submit_bulk_move

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only names a mutation without revealing that it is a bulk write, whether it is asynchronous, whether partial failures can happen, what permissions are required, or what the response contains.

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 short, but it is under-specified rather than usefully concise. A three-word phrase for a tool with a nested request body and bulk semantics does not provide enough structure or front-loaded guidance for an agent.

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?

This is a complex bulk operation with nested parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, yet the description provides almost no context. It omits mapping semantics, notification behavior, error handling, and permission requirements, making it inadequate for safe 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?

Schema description coverage is reported as 100%, so the baseline applies even though the tool description adds nothing about parameters. The schema exposes body fields like sendBulkNotification and targetToSourcesMapping, but the description does not explain their meaning or resolve the schema inconsistency where required targetToMultipleSourceMapping is not defined in properties.

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 'Bulk move issues' essentially restates the tool name 'submit_bulk_move' without adding operational detail. It does not specify the effect of the move, what distinguishes it from siblings like edit_issue or transition_issue, or what 'submit' implies.

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 given about when to use this tool versus the many related issue-manipulation tools. The description does not mention prerequisites, alternatives, or the scenario in which a bulk move is the correct operation.

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