move_group

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool performs a 'move' operation, implying mutation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as permissions required, whether the move is reversible, effects on child groups or associated data, error conditions, or response format. This leaves significant gaps 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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Move a group') and clarifies the destination. There is no wasted wording, and it directly communicates the essential information without redundancy.

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 is a mutation operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral aspects like side effects, error handling, or return values, which are critical for safe and effective use. The high schema coverage helps but doesn't compensate for missing context.

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%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds minimal value by implying 'newParentId' can be omitted to move to root, which is already covered in the schema description. No additional semantics beyond the schema are provided, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 action ('Move') and resource ('a group'), specifying the target destination ('to a new parent or to root level'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_group' or 'delete_group' by focusing on relocation, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from similar tools like 'update_group' which might also modify group properties.

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 doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing group IDs), exclusions (e.g., cannot move to a child group), or comparisons to siblings like 'update_group' for other modifications. Usage is implied but not explicitly defined.

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