Move Note

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

Description adds crucial behaviors beyond annotations: link updating and failure condition. Annotations say destructiveHint=true but no further details. Description fills gap with concrete side effects.

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 waste. Each sentence conveys essential information: action, side effect, and constraint. Front-loaded with verb and resource.

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?

Covers purpose, key behavior, and failure case. Missing prerequisites (e.g., note must exist) and return value. Given no output schema, description could mention success signal. Still fairly complete for a mutation tool with good annotations.

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 100%, so description adds little beyond schema. It restates 'vault-relative' path and link update behavior, but doesn't clarify parameter types or defaults more than the schema's own descriptions.

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 states a specific verb (Move), resource (note), and key behaviors (update links, fails if destination exists). It distinguishes from sibling tools like rename_note by specifying path change and link updating.

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?

Only implicit usage context: fails on destination exists. No explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternatives (e.g., rename_note for just renaming). Sibling tools exist but no guidance.

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