Move Object

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

Annotations already indicate idempotent and non-destructive, and the description adds context on how the move works (relative placement, folder changes). However, it does not disclose required permissions, potential side effects, or what happens to associated data, which would be valuable beyond annotations.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and efficiently summarizes parameter roles without redundancy. Every sentence contributes meaningful 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?

While the description covers parameter usage, it does not explain the return value, side effects, or constraints (e.g., moving to same location, permission requirements). Given the moderate complexity (8 params, no output schema), more contextual details would be beneficial.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the individual parameter purposes are clear from the schema. The description adds value by grouping parameters logically (position, folder, workspace, account), providing a conceptual framework for using them together.

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 the resource types (folder, board, overview). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like move_item_to_group or update_folder by specifying it handles moving of entire objects, not items or updates.

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 provides parameter usage hints (e.g., 'Use position for relative placement') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. It lacks guidance on when not to use it or which sibling tools are more appropriate for specific operations.

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