Move Live Pure Data Object

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'rebuilding the visible MCP live canvas,' which hints at a potentially broad side effect, but it does not clarify whether this is destructive, whether a live session is required, or how it affects connected objects. This is insufficient for a mutation-like operation.

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 a single sentence, front-loaded with the main action, and contains no filler words. It efficiently states the purpose and a key implementation detail, though it could be improved by adding usage guidance without much extra length.

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 the absence of annotations and an output schema, and the potentially impactful side effect of rebuilding the canvas, the description is incomplete. It lacks information on preconditions (e.g., active live session), return values, error behavior, and the scope of the rebuild, making it hard for an agent to anticipate the consequences of 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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description does not explain the parameters explicitly. While id, x, and y are somewhat self-explanatory and the schema provides constraints, the description does not clarify units, coordinate origin, or the meaning of 'agent-created' in relation to id. It only vaguely references 'new coordinates.'

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 the tool moves an agent-created live object, using the specific verb 'move' and naming the resource ('agent-created live object'). It also specifies the mechanism ('by rebuilding the visible MCP live canvas'), but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like pd_live_update_object, which could also reposition objects.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool compared to alternatives is provided. The phrase 'agent-created live object' implies a restriction, but there is no mention of when to choose this over pd_live_update_object or other sibling tools, nor any prerequisites or exclusions.

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