datalens_workbooks_moveMove a workbook into a collection, or to the root when no collection is given; optionally rename it during the move.
Move a workbook into a collection, or into the root when no collection is given.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| title | No | New title to give it on the way. | |
| workbook_id | Yes | Workbook id. | |
| collection_id | No | The collection to put the workbook in; the root when left out. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.122.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true, which is the whole safety profile. The description adds nothing beyond that and merely restates the schema's collection/root default; no permission requirements, side effects on entries, or concurrency caveats are disclosed.
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?
A single sentence, front-loaded with the action and its destination, with zero filler. Nothing to trim.
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 three-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description is adequate but thin: it omits whether the move requires access to both source and destination, what happens to the workbook's entries or bindings, and how it relates to the bulk variant. Annotations carry part of the burden, but gaps remain.
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 100%, so workbook_id, collection_id and title are all documented in the schema (including the root default), making 3 the baseline. The description adds no new parameter meaning beyond what the schema already states.
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?
Clear specific verb (move) plus resource (workbook) plus destination semantics, including the root fallback. It does not name or contrast with the obvious sibling datalens_workbooks_move_bulk, so it falls short of a 5.
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 implies when to use it (single workbook relocation into a collection or root), but gives no explicit when-not conditions and never points to datalens_workbooks_move_bulk for multiple workbooks or to datalens_collections_move for collection relocation. Usage is only inferred.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.