move_item

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

Beyond the idempotentHint annotation, the description explicitly discloses that it uses a 'partial PATCH' and that nothing else on the item changes. This adds meaningful behavioral context that is not captured by the annotation alone.

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 compact, with the main purpose in the first sentence and supplementary details in a second sentence. It is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place without unnecessary filler.

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 tool's simplicity (two required string parameters, no output schema) and the presence of an idempotent annotation, the description adequately covers the key behavior, parameters, and location-path guidance. It does not explain return values or error cases, but these are not critical for a straightforward move operation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the tool description compensates well by explaining the 'location' parameter format (location name or /-separated path) and the 'identifier' parameter accepted formats (assetId / alias field / exact name). This adds meaning beyond the bare schema field names.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Move an item to another location', and lists possible identifier types (assetId / alias field / exact name). However, it does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling tool 'set_location', which may serve a similar purpose.

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 usage when an item needs to be relocated and gives a pointer to 'list_locations' for location paths, but it does not explicitly describe when to prefer this tool over alternatives like 'set_location' or 'set_item'. No exclusions or alternative scenarios are mentioned.

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