move_file

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully covers behavior: it discloses that overwrite controls failure vs replacement, describes dry_run to preview actions, and mentions return format. This exceeds the burden without annotations.

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 highly concise: a single sentence defines purpose, followed by a bullet-point list of parameters and a return line. Every sentence adds value, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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?

Given 4 parameters, the presence of an output schema, and no annotations, the description is complete: it explains all parameters, behaviors (overwrite, dry_run), and return format. No additional context is needed.

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?

Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description compensates by explicitly defining each parameter's meaning (e.g., 'source: Existing source path', 'dry_run: Return the planned action without moving'), adding crucial context beyond type-only 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 'Move a file or directory', providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like copy_file or rename_file by explicitly naming the action as moving.

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 explains that existing destinations fail unless overwrite is true, giving clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives, though the behavior is well-defined.

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