io_list_moves

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing behavioral beyond that: no pagination semantics for startAt/limit, no default result count, no note that responses may be truncated at 100, and no mention of the compact/full response-shape tradeoff documented in the schema.

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, purpose first, zero filler — well front-loaded. It is arguably under-sized for an 11-parameter filtering tool, but nothing present is wasted.

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 paginated, heavily filterable list tool with no output schema, the description omits pagination behavior, default and maximum page size, date-range semantics, and sort options. An agent can call it, but cannot predict response volume or how to page through results without reading every schema field.

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 the baseline is 3 and the schema already documents all 11 parameters. The description's mention of "status, building, or assignee" is redundant with the schema and slightly imprecise, since the schema exposes requesterId rather than an assignee field.

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 names a specific verb and resource ("List iOffice move requests"), which is unambiguous and distinct from get/create/update/approve/cancel siblings in the io_*_move family. However, it never explicitly contrasts itself with io_get_move, so an agent must infer the list-vs-single distinction from naming convention alone.

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 second sentence lists filterable dimensions but reads as parameter detail rather than usage guidance. There is no statement of when to reach for this tool versus io_get_move, no prerequisites, and no exclusions (e.g., that results are paginated and may require multiple calls).

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