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 does not mention overwrite behavior, whether directories are supported, or what happens on error. The only behavioral context is the sandbox-relative path requirement.

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 consists of two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action. Every word earns its place, with no 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?

The tool is simple, and the description covers the core function and path constraint, with an output schema present so return values need no explanation. However, with no annotations and negligible schema descriptions, it leaves unspecified behaviors like overwrite handling and directory support, which are relevant 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?

Schema descriptions are empty (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It adds that paths must be relative to the sandbox, which gives meaning to src_relative_path and dst_relative_path, but it does not explain formats or constraints beyond that.

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 'Move or rename a file within the sandbox,' providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_files, make_directory, and delete_file.

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?

It clarifies that both paths must be relative to the sandbox, which is a key usage constraint. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use the tool, though the purpose makes it obvious.

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