Move object

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description adds context: 'the edit lands on the working copy only (reversible),' 'a translate(dx,dy) is prepended to the target's transform (child geometry untouched),' and a risk warning. It also advises to render and look before trusting.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose, usage guidelines, key parameters, return shape, example, and safety note. Every sentence is informative and no redundant text.

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 output schema and annotations, the description thoroughly covers the tool's behavior: return shape (EditResult details), reversibility, and the need for preview. It is complete for a move operation.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description explains the key parameters: 'dx/dy are a delta in the parent coordinate space,' and includes an example call. It adds meaning to all four required parameters beyond the schema types.

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 tool's action: 'Translate an object/group by (dx, dy) in its parent coordinate space.' It uses a specific verb ('translate') and resource ('object/group'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like scale_object, rotate_object, and tile.

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 explicit guidance on when to use: 'repositioning one object; get its id from find_objects.' It also lists alternatives: 'To resize use scale_object, to spin use rotate_object, to lay out copies use tile.'

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