move_file

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

The description adds meaningful behavior beyond the destructiveHint annotation, explicitly stating 'never overwrites the target' and requiring the current source SHA-256. This conveys safety semantics and concurrency checks, though it does not explicitly mention source deletion, which is implied by 'move'.

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 sentences, zero filler. The first sentence states the primary action, the second adds essential conditions, making it optimally concise and front-loaded.

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 destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers core semantics, safety constraints, and session scope. It lacks an explicit statement that the source is deleted and does not describe error behavior if the target exists, but 'move' implies removal and 'never overwrites' implies failure, so it is reasonably 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining the expected_source_sha256 parameter ('Requires the current source SHA-256') and target_path behavior ('never overwrites the target'). Other parameters like session_id and source_path are left to self-explanatory names, but the critical safety semantics are covered.

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 opens with 'Move one bounded regular text file within a Direct session,' a specific verb+resource+scope that clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like create_file, delete_file, and sync_file. The constraints 'bounded' and 'regular text file' add precision beyond the tool name.

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?

It provides clear context: use when you need to move a bounded regular text file in a Direct session, and it states a key precondition ('Requires the current source SHA-256'). However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or scenarios to avoid, so it stops short of a 5.

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