Reparent Node

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

The description adds behavioral details about index validation and default append behavior. The annotations (openWorldHint, idempotentHint) already hint at side effects, but the description does not elaborate on what happens to the old parent or other consequences. No contradiction with 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 concise, consisting of three short sentences. It is front-loaded with the primary action and provides necessary index guidance without any redundant phrasing.

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 rich schema (100% coverage), output schema, and annotations, the description is adequate for a straightforward reparent operation. It could mention edge-case restrictions (e.g., cannot reparent to itself or a descendant), but such details are not essential for typical use and are not indicated by the structured data.

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 the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description only reiterates the index behavior already present in the schema, providing no additional parameter semantics beyond what is structured.

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 'Reparent a node' with a specific resource (node) and optional index. This distinguishes it from sibling node tools like rename, delete, clone, and group by focusing on the parent-child relationship.

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 gives clear context on when to use the tool (reparenting) and how to use the index parameter (valid range, omit to append). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or conditions when not to use this tool, so it falls short of fully explicit usage guidelines.

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