supabase_move_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It fails to disclose whether the operation is destructive (deletes source), idempotent, atomic, or what error conditions to expect. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be metadata noise without behavioral meaning.

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 with no extraneous explanation. However, the '[UNIFIED]' prefix at the beginning is structural noise that doesn't help the agent understand the tool's function.

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 file operation with four parameters, no output schema, and zero annotations, the description is inadequate. It omits return value semantics, error handling, and parameter details that would be necessary for an agent to invoke this tool correctly without trial and error.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for four undocumented parameters. While it implies 'bucket' and 'file' (paths), it offers no explanation for 'site' or the expected path format (e.g., leading slashes, folder delimiters), nor does it explicitly map 'from_path' and 'to_path' to source and destination.

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 or rename') and resource ('file') with a specific scope constraint ('within the same bucket'). This effectively distinguishes it from sibling operations like upload, download, or delete.

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 the constraint 'within the same bucket,' which implicitly defines a boundary condition. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (e.g., delete+upload) or prerequisites for successful execution.

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