clickup_task_move

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 states the action ('Move') but doesn't cover critical traits: whether this is a destructive operation (e.g., if it affects task history or dependencies), permission requirements, rate limits, or what the response looks like (since there's no output schema). This leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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 a single, efficient sentence with a clarifying parenthetical. It's front-loaded with the core action and wastes no words, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks behavioral context (e.g., side effects, error conditions), usage guidance, and output details. While the schema covers parameters well, the overall context for safe and effective use is insufficient.

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%, with clear descriptions for all parameters (e.g., 'Destination list ID' for list_id). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or constraints. The baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 resource ('a task to a different list'), with the parenthetical '(change home list)' adding specificity. It distinguishes from siblings like 'clickup_task_update' or 'clickup_task_create' by focusing on relocation rather than modification or creation, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from all possible alternatives.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing appropriate permissions), when not to use it (e.g., for moving tasks within the same list via other methods), or refer to sibling tools like 'clickup_task_update' for other modifications.

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