move_task

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the semantic effect (status change on the kanban board), which is useful. Yet it doesn't mention potential side effects, permissions, reversibility, or what happens to the task's position within the column, leaving some ambiguity for a mutation tool.

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, focused sentence with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the primary verb and object ('Move a task') and adds a concise parenthetical clarification, making it highly readable and efficient.

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 simple 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the essential context: what the operation does and its effect. It could optionally mention that the column is on the same kanban board or clarify the return value, but these are minor gaps given the tool's simplicity.

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?

The schema already provides descriptions for both parameters (task UUID and target column UUID), achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no further parameter-specific meaning beyond reinforcing that the column is the destination, so the baseline score 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Move a task') and the resource affected (task), with the specific outcome of changing its status on the kanban board. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like move_task_to_project (which moves tasks between projects) and update_task (which handles general updates).

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 for moving a task to a different kanban column, which is clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as move_task_to_project or toggle_task_done, though the column-specific wording provides a strong hint.

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