qui_move_rss_item

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says it's a POST request, implying mutability, but doesn't state effects, permissions, or reversibility. The parameter-passing convention is procedural, not behavioral.

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?

Two sentences with no fluff; efficiently conveys the HTTP method and argument structure.

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 an open-ended arguments object, the description is critically incomplete. It doesn't specify required keys, the meaning of 'move', or the expected request body, making it inadequate for correct 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 schema offers no parameter details (0% coverage), so the description's convention for separating path, query, and body is valuable. However, it fails to enumerate the required path variables (e.g., instanceID) or body fields, leaving the agent guessing.

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 identifies the specific endpoint and HTTP method, making it clear this tool moves RSS items. However, it lacks a plain-language statement of what 'move' accomplishes, so it is clear but not fully explanatory.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternative RSS tools like qui_remove_rss_item or qui_add_rss_feed. The description only explains parameter passing, not usage context.

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