bin_move_clip

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the transparency burden. It does disclose the root-if-None behavior beyond the schema, and 'move' implies removal from the source location. It does not mention failure modes, permissions, or whether the target folder must already exist.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The conditional root behavior is packed into a short parenthetical, preserving both clarity and brevity.

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 simple two-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is mostly adequate. The main gap is the underspecified folder parameter, which could lead an agent to pass the wrong value type. The description could be complete with one more clause about folder format or validation.

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 must compensate. It adds meaning by clarifying that folder=None targets the root, which the anyOf schema does not convey. However, it leaves clip_id and the expected format of the folder parameter (ID vs name, existing folder) unexplained.

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 names a specific verb ('Move'), a resource ('clip'), and a destination ('folder' or root). It is unambiguous as a bin operation, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like timeline_move_clip.

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 action itself implies when to use it, but there is no explicit guidance about alternatives or non-use cases. The parenthetical 'or root if folder None' is more about parameter behavior than usage context.

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