move_node

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only says 'Move a node within its parent' without explaining side effects, whether it's a write operation, how indexing works, or possible failure modes. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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, which is structurally simple and easy to read. However, it is under-specified; the brevity sacrifices critical detail, so while it earns a middle score for conciseness, it fails to fully satisfy the purpose of a tool description.

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 two required parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description should explain the role of each parameter and the exact effect of the move. It does not describe the return value, error conditions, or how it relates to similar tools, leaving the agent with insufficient context to invoke it correctly.

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 does not explain the meaning of 'path' or 'index' beyond their names. 'index' could mean the target position or the node to move, creating ambiguity. The description adds no value to the raw schema.

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 action ('Move') and the resource ('a node'), with a scope qualifier ('within its parent') that helps distinguish it from sibling tools like reparent_node. However, it doesn't explicitly explain that 'move' means reordering among siblings or the exact semantics of the move, so it's clear but not fully differentiated.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as reparent_node or add_node. The phrase 'within its parent' implies it's for same-parent reordering, but this is not explicitly stated, and no alternatives are mentioned.

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