acc_move_folder

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

Annotations only supply readOnlyHint:false, so the description adds meaningful behavioral context: contents move with the folder, direct permissions move while inherited permissions re-derive from the new parent, and re-checking with acc_get_folder_permissions is recommended. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

Two compact sentences: the first names the action and scope, the second conveys an important behavioral caveat. No filler or redundant wording.

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?

The tool has an output schema, and all parameters are documented in the schema. The description supplies the critical behavioral nuance about folder contents and permission handling. While it omits edge-case constraints like moving into a descendant folder, the provided information is sufficient for correct invocation.

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?

All three parameters have schema descriptions with 100% coverage, so the schema already documents project_id, folder_id, and new_parent_folder_id. The description adds no new parameter-level detail beyond reinforcing the new parent concept, keeping this at the baseline.

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?

States a clear, specific verb and resource: 'Move a folder (with its contents) under another parent folder.' This distinguishes it from sibling operations like acc_rename_folder, acc_delete_folder, or acc_copy_file, which have different purposes.

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 implies usage through its purpose statement, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like acc_copy_file or acc_create_folder_structure. The permission re-check note provides follow-up guidance, but not tool-selection boundaries.

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