ftp_move

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

The description offers only the basic operation without detailing side effects. It does not disclose whether the destination path will be overwritten, if directories are supported, or what happens to the source file, leaving the agent to infer behavior.

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, direct sentence with no unnecessary words. It effectively communicates the core action.

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 operation, the description is insufficiently detailed. It does not explain important behaviors such as overwrite handling, directory support, or success/failure reporting, which are critical for an agent invoking the tool correctly.

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?

The input schema already provides clear descriptions for all three parameters (connection, sourcePath, destPath), covering 100% of parameter semantics. The description adds no additional parameter information, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 function: moving a remote file to a new location. This verb-resource structure distinguishes it from sibling tools like ftp_copy (which duplicates) and ftp_delete (which removes), though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from ftp_rename.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention scenarios where move is preferred over copy or rename, nor any prerequisites for using the tool.

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