grafana_mover_dashboard

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses only that an existing dashboard is relocated; it says nothing about required permissions, whether the target folder must pre-exist, what happens to folder-level permissions on the moved dashboard, or whether the operation is reversible.

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?

A single well-formed sentence, front-loaded with the action, but the leading '65.' is a numbering artifact from a source list that adds no meaning and slightly obscures the opening.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the core action is clear. However, for a mutation tool with no annotations and zero-documented parameters, important operational detail (permissions, folder existence, UID semantics) is absent.

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 the description must compensate, but it only generically maps to 'the dashboard' and 'the new folder'. It never clarifies that the dashboard identifier is a UID string rather than an ID or title, nor the format of the numeric 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 states a specific verb ('Mover') and resource ('um dashboard existente') plus the destination ('outra pasta'), which is enough to distinguish it from siblings like grafana_atualizar_dashboard or grafana_criar_pasta. It does not reference any sibling by name, keeping it at 4 rather than 5.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance and no mention of prerequisites such as folder existence or permissions. An agent can infer the intent from the verb, but nothing tells it when to pick this over updating a dashboard's folder field via grafana_atualizar_dashboard.

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