move_collection_item

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-readonly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world operation, so the safety profile is partly covered. The description adds a genuinely useful trait not in the annotations: the operation is a dry-run by default, so no mutation occurs unless explicitly requested. It still omits behavior on missing folders or permission requirements.

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?

Two tight sentences with zero filler; the action is front-loaded and the dry-run caveat follows immediately. Every word 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?

For a 4-parameter mutation tool with 0% schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose and the dry-run default but leaves the three required ID parameters and error/permission behavior unexplained. It is minimally viable rather than complete.

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 0%, so the description must carry the burden. It conceptually maps 'instance' to instance_id, 'folder' to to_folder_id, and clarifies dry_run's default, but adds no meaning for release_id (why it is required alongside instance_id) and no ID formats or constraints, so compensation is only partial.

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 (move), resource (collection instance) and destination (another folder), which clearly differentiates it from siblings like add_to_collection, remove_from_collection, and rename_folder. It does not explicitly name a sibling to route against, so it lands just short of a 5.

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 only guidance is implicit: 'Dry-run by default' tells the agent it must flip dry_run=false to actually effect the move. There is no explicit when-to-use vs alternative, no prerequisites, and no contrast with add_to_collection/remove_from_collection, leaving usage largely inferred.

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