Move attributes to folder

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context beyond that: the prerequisite folder creation step, the root shorthand ([] = root), and the exact return shape {ok, target, moved:{attributes,folders}}. It does not, however, spell out that moved items are removed from their prior location.

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 dense sentence with the action front-loaded, followed by the prerequisite and the output contract. Every clause (folder path forms, identifier forms, output shape) earns its place.

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?

Although no output schema exists, the description inlines the return structure {ok, target, moved}, names the prerequisite creation tool, and clarifies root targeting. For a 4-parameter mutation tool this leaves nothing an agent needs 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 100% and the schema already documents target/folders/attributes forms, GUID patterns, index lookup, and the attributeType enum. The description only adds minor clarification (GUID or exact localized name, [] = root), so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (moves) and resource (attributes and/or attribute folders of one type) into a target folder, and explicitly references the sibling create_attribute_folders for folder creation. An agent can distinguish this from move_navigator_item, move_elements, and modify_attributes without opening schemas.

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?

Gives clear prerequisites: the target folder must be created beforehand with create_attribute_folders, and [] denotes root. It lacks explicit 'when not to use' guidance (e.g. vs modify_attributes for renaming instead of relocating), so it stops short of full routing coverage.

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