move_document

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It implies a mutation ('Move') but doesn't disclose permissions required, whether the move is reversible, effects on document links or metadata, error conditions, or response format. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that modifies document structure.

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 with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 complexity of a mutation tool with 3 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on behavior, parameter usage, error handling, and output, leaving the agent with significant uncertainty about how to invoke it correctly.

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 compensate but adds little. It mentions 'collection' and 'parent document' as destinations, hinting at parameters 'collectionId' and 'parentDocumentId', but doesn't explain their relationship (e.g., mutually exclusive?), formats, or that 'documentId' is required. With 3 parameters and no schema descriptions, this is inadequate.

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') and resource ('document'), specifying the destination ('to another collection or under a parent document'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'batch_move_documents' by implying single-document operation, though not explicitly. However, it lacks explicit differentiation from tools like 'update_document' which might also handle document relocation.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., document must exist), exclusions (e.g., cannot move to a non-existent collection), or comparisons with sibling tools like 'batch_move_documents' for multiple documents or 'update_document' for other modifications.

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