cloud_move

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is largely covered. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact—it will not overwrite ('sin sobrescribir')—which is consistent with destructiveHint=false. It still omits what happens on error, cross-volume behavior, and permission requirements.

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 short sentence with the no-overwrite constraint front-loaded after the verb. Efficient, though the brevity is partly under-specification rather than pure conciseness.

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-required-parameter mutation tool with zero schema coverage and no output schema, the description should explain what volume/path/destination mean and what the operation does to existing files. Annotations cover safety hints, but parameter and failure-mode context is missing.

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% and all three params (volume, path, destination) are undocumented in both schema and description. The verbs 'mueve o renombra' weakly imply that destination can be a new name or a new location, but no format, path syntax, or volume semantics are given.

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 verbs ('mueve o renombra') plus a resource scope ('dentro de una nube'), so the agent can distinguish cloud_move from the o2_move family. However it does not name the closest sibling (cloud_copy) or explain the boundary, so it stops short of 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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the obvious alternative cloud_copy or how it differs from cloud_copy's copy semantics versus move. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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