move_file

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 explains the key behavioral trait (default removal from current parents vs. multi-location option), which is valuable. However, it doesn't mention permission requirements, error conditions, rate limits, or what the output contains despite having an output schema.

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 perfectly concise with two sentences that each earn their place. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second explains the key behavioral nuance. There's zero waste or redundancy.

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 tool's moderate complexity (file movement operation), no annotations, but 100% schema coverage and an output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It explains the core behavior well, though it could benefit from mentioning permission requirements or error scenarios. The output schema means return values don't need explanation.

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 three parameters thoroughly. The description adds marginal value by clarifying the semantics of remove_from_current_parents (default behavior and alternative), but doesn't provide additional meaning beyond what's in the schema descriptions for file_id and new_parent_folder_id.

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 specific action ('Move a file') and resource ('to a different folder in Google Drive'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like copy_file, trash_file, or permanently_delete_file. It precisely defines the operation without being tautological.

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 clear context about the default behavior (removing from all current parents) and the alternative behavior (keeping in multiple locations), which helps guide usage. However, it doesn't explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like copy_file or when moving versus other file operations.

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