schematic_move_components

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the action and prerequisite but lacks details on behavioral traits such as permanence, error handling, constraints (e.g., snapping), or side effects. The description is minimal 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 two concise sentences, front-loading the main action and then providing a prerequisite. There is no fluff; every word contributes useful 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?

Given the tool's complexity (3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the core action and a key prerequisite. However, it lacks information about return values, error scenarios, and whether the operation is reversible. It is adequate but not thorough.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by stating 'absolute schematic coordinates' for x/y and 'primitive IDs' for componentId. However, it does not explain the optional 'reason' parameter or provide full details on the pageUuid. It partially clarifies the parameters but is not comprehensive.

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 verb 'move' and the resource 'existing part components' with the scope 'to absolute schematic coordinates'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings (e.g., create, delete, inspect) by specifying the action and providing a prerequisite hint.

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 includes a clear prerequisite: 'Inspect the page first to obtain primitive IDs', guiding the agent on the necessary step before using this tool. It does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use, but the context is sufficient for a straightforward move operation.

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