planka_move_card

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses that the tool moves a card and supports positioning, but lacks details on whether moving to the same list is allowed, side effects, or data preservation. The behavior is predictable for a move 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 two sentences with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the core action and follows with a usage example, making it efficiently scannable for an AI agent.

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 low complexity of a move tool and the fully described parameters, the description is mostly complete. It covers the main operation and usage. However, without annotations, it could have mentioned if the move always changes list or can also reorder within the same list, but the example implies cross-list move.

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 documents all three parameters with descriptions. The description adds value by clarifying that position 'lower = higher' and defaults to end of list, which goes beyond the schema's 'Position in the list (lower = higher)'.

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 verb 'Move' and resource 'card', and specifies the scope 'to a different list or position'. It also provides a concrete example of workflow transitions ('To Do' -> 'In Progress'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like planka_update_card.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool ('for workflow transitions') and gives an example. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like planka_update_card for other modifications.

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