move_file

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses atomicity, safe failure on existing destination, and directory constraints. Missing details on symlinks or error handling for missing source, but substantial transparency.

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?

Four sentences, with purpose front-loaded. Every sentence adds value: purpose, cross-directory support, safe behavior, rename capability, and directory constraint. No wasted words.

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 simple two-parameter tool without output schema, the description covers purpose, behavior, and constraints. Lacks details on recursive moves or cross-filesystem behavior, but these are reasonable gaps given simplicity.

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 description must compensate. It implies source and destination are paths and adds constraints (must be within allowed directories). However, it does not explicitly describe each parameter's format or constraints, missing an opportunity for clarity.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'relocate or rename' and resource 'files and directories'. It distinguishes from sibling tools (none do moving/renaming) and provides specific behaviors like cross-directory moves and same-directory renames.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use compared to siblings like copy or file_operations. Context is implied but not detailed, making it adequate but not strong.

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