Move File

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

Annotations already indicate destructive nature (destructiveHint=true) and non-read-only. The description adds minimal behavioral context—'move or rename' implies mutation, but it does not disclose potential overwrites, conflicts, or cross-filesystem behavior. It neither contradicts nor significantly enhances annotations.

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, efficient sentence that conveys essential information without extraneous words. It is front-loaded and easily parsable.

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 file move operation, the description covers the core action but omits important context: no mention of error handling (e.g., destination exists), cross-filesystem moves, or renaming within the same directory. Given the absence of an output schema, these gaps reduce completeness.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions ('Absolute path of the file or folder to move' and 'Absolute destination path'). The tool description repeats this verbatim, adding no new semantic value beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 or rename'), the affected resource ('file or folder'), and the outcome ('to a new location'). It is specific and distinct from sibling tools like 'move_note' or 'move_window', leaving no ambiguity about the tool's 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings (e.g., 'bulk_move_notes' or 'trash_file'), nor any conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions. The agent must infer from context, which reduces clarity.

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