move_message

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

The description includes the trait 'reversibile' (reversible), which is helpful beyond the schema. However, it omits other important behaviors like required permissions, side effects on the source folder, or error conditions. With no annotations, the description carries full burden, and this minimal disclosure is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 concise sentence that efficiently communicates the core action and a key behavioral trait (reversibility) without any redundant wording.

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 tool with four parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It omits parameter formats, return values, error handling, and usage context, making it inadequate for reliable tool invocation.

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?

The description provides no explanation of the four parameters (folder_id, message_id, account_id, source_folder). Schema description coverage is 0%, and the schema itself lacks descriptions, so the agent has no semantic guidance for these fields.

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 the tool moves a message to another folder, with the verb 'move' and a specific resource ('message'). It also notes reversibility, distinguishing it from destructive actions like delete_message. Though it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, the action is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as delete_message or list_folders. The description provides no context about scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision support.

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