move_nodes

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already indicate this is not read-only and not marked idempotent or destructive, so the description does not need to re-state those. It adds useful context about coordinate offsets and supported ID formats, but it does not disclose potential side effects, coordinate system assumptions, or failure behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with a concise summary, parameter list, and example. The bilingual repetitions add some length but remain helpful for multilingual users and do not obscure the essential information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a relatively simple mutation tool, the description provides enough information to call it correctly: ID formats, all three offsets, default behavior via schema, and a representative example. It does not mention return values or error conditions, but those are not critical for a move operation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries full responsibility for parameter meaning. It thoroughly explains each parameter: ids accepts int, list, or '1to10' range strings, and offset_x/y/z are defined as offsets in model units with a clear example.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description begins with a clear verb and resource: 'Move nodes by an offset', which precisely distinguishes this translate operation from sibling tools like update_node, renumber_nodes, or merge_nodes. The bilingual label and example reinforce the exact behavior without ambiguity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage when nodes need to be translated by X/Y/Z offsets, and the example illustrates a concrete scenario. However, it does not explicitly address when to choose this tool over alternatives such as update_node, nor does it state exclusions or prerequisites.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.