move

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the operation moves a memory entry and may rename it, but it does not disclose collision behavior, whether the destination folder must already exist, whether the original source entry is removed, or what the response looks like. For a mutating operation, these are notable gaps.

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 a single efficient sentence that front-loads the primary action and includes the optional rename behavior. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary elaboration.

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 four-parameter operation with no output schema, the description and schema together cover the basic mechanics. However, it is only minimally adequate because it lacks usage guidance and behavioral side-effect disclosure, which are important when annotations are absent.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description adds little beyond what the schema provides, only echoing the folder-move and optional-rename behavior. Baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema carries the parameter-meaning burden.

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 clearly states a specific action, resource, and destination: 'Move a memory entry to another folder, optionally renaming it.' This is enough to understand the tool's core purpose. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like organize_memories, but the move operation is distinctive enough among the listed siblings.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention situations where move is preferred over delete+remember, nor does it disambiguate from organize_memories, which might also reorganize memory entries. Usage context is left entirely to inference.

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