Move file

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds nothing beyond this—it does not mention overwrite behavior on collision, cross-device move semantics, or whether renaming within a directory differs from relocating across paths.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and completely free of padding, which is appropriate. It is short to the point of under-specification rather than verbose, so length itself is not the problem.

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 4-parameter, destructive, path-based operation with no output schema and zero schema coverage, the description supplies far too little. It omits the required-parameter semantics and any collision or destructive consequence detail the agent needs to invoke it safely.

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 0% for 4 parameters, and the description mentions none of them. It never clarifies that 'source' and 'destination' are required paths, nor what the optional deviceId/deviceName selectors do, leaving the agent with no semantic guidance beyond bare property names.

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/rename) and resource (file or directory), so the agent knows exactly what the tool operates on. However, it offers no differentiation from adjacent siblings like copy_file or delete_path, which an agent choosing among filesystem operations would benefit from.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus copy_file, delete_path, or fs_transaction, and no prerequisites or conditional context are given. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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