obsidian_move

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses the key side effect of 'automatically updating all wikilinks', which is useful. However, it does not mention other behavioral aspects such as overwrite behavior, permissions required, or failure scenarios, leaving some gap for a mutation tool.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the main action and includes the critical side effect. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or extraneous 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 simple move tool with two well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It covers the core operation and the notable side effect. It does not explicitly address edge cases like destination conflicts, but this is acceptable given the tool's simplicity.

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 100%, with both 'file' (source) and 'to' (destination) parameters described in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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: 'Move or rename a file in the vault'. This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like obsidian_search or obsidian_tags, which handle different operations. The additional detail about updating wikilinks further clarifies its unique scope.

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 implies when to use this tool (when moving or renaming files) and no sibling tool overlaps with this functionality, so the context is clear. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or mentions of alternative tools, so it doesn't fully earn a 5.

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