Move a JMeter test element and its subtree to a new parent, optionally setting its position among siblings, while preventing invalid moves into its own subtree.
Move an element (and its subtree) to a new parent, optionally at a specific index among the new parent's children (default: appended last). Rejects moving a node into its own subtree.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| index | No | ||
| nodeId | Yes | ||
| planId | Yes | ||
| newParentId | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.4.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the entire subtree moves, that index defaults to appending last, and that moving into the node's own subtree is rejected. It does not state whether the operation is reversible or what the response contains, but the core mutation behavior is well specified.
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?
A single sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then packs the optional index behavior and rejection rule without redundancy. Every clause adds information.
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 mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the core move behavior and a key edge case. It omits whether moving to the current parent is allowed (relevant given reorder_children sibling), what a successful move returns, and planId's role, so an agent may still have open questions.
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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains index (specific position, default appended last) and clarifies newParentId/nodeId roles through the sentence. However, planId is never described, leaving one required parameter's semantics to inference.
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') and resource ('an element (and its subtree) to a new parent'), with optional index semantics. This clearly differentiates it from siblings like reorder_children and remove_element.
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 explicit when-to-use or alternatives are provided. It does not mention that reorder_children should be used for same-parent reordering, nor when move_element is preferred over update_element. The only usage constraint is the self-subtree rejection, which is a validity rule rather than selection guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.