drive_file_move

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action, omitting important details such as whether permissions are affected, if multiple files can be moved, if the operation is reversible, or any side effects like automatic removal of old parents (though a parameter hints at this).

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 extremely concise at one sentence, but at the expense of completeness. While there is no wasted text, the brevity fails to convey necessary details given the tool's complexity (4 parameters, no annotations). It is efficiently written but under-informative.

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 has 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely lacking. It provides no information on return values, required permissions, error scenarios, or parameter dependencies. The description is insufficient for an agent to use the tool reliably.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, and the tool's description adds no information about any parameter. Parameters like 'account', 'file_id', 'new_parent_id', and 'remove_old_parents' are not explained, leaving the agent without essential context to set them correctly.

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 ('file'), and the target ('new folder'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like rename, share, or trash. However, it lacks specificity about scope (e.g., within account) and the meaning of 'folder' in the context of drives.

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 move versus alternative tools (e.g., rename, share). There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use the tool. The description is purely functional without contextual guidance.

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