tf_state_mv

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Move resource in state' without explaining whether the operation is destructive, reversible, requires backend access, or has side effects on the state file.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence. While brevity is good, it lacks structure and important details, making it minimally viable but not helpful.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the concept of moving resources in state, the role of 'dir', or the implications of the operation. Sibling tools include many state-related ones, so more context is needed to differentiate.

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 schema has three parameters (dir, source, destination) with zero description coverage. The description does not explain what 'dir' means, and only hints at source/destination via the verb 'move'. It fails to add meaningful context beyond the parameter 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?

The description 'Move resource in state' clearly indicates the action (move) and the resource (resource in state). It distinguishes from siblings like tf_state_rm (remove) and tf_state_list (list), but could be more specific about what 'state' refers to (Terraform state).

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 like tf_state_rm or tf_import. The description does not mention any prerequisites, contexts, or conditions for using tf_state_mv.

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