rhino_move

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

Annotations only provide readOnlyHint=false, signaling mutation. The description says 'Translate (or copy)' but does not disclose that original objects are repositioned when make_copy is false, does not mention units or coordinate conventions, and provides no context about undo or document behavior. There is no contradiction with annotations, but the disclosure is minimal.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to identifying the core operation, so it is concise and well-structured, even though it is sparse.

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?

For a mutation tool with nested parameters and many sibling transform tools, one sentence is not enough context. It does not explain effect on source objects, coordinate system, units, or when to prefer this over similar move/orient/flow tools. The output schema exists but does not compensate for the missing usage context.

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%, and the description does not compensate. Saying 'by a vector' adds only broad meaning; it does not explain the x/y/z component semantics, default z=0 behavior, or the relationship between object_ids and translation. The schema has some nested descriptions, but the tool description itself adds almost no parameter-level value.

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 identifies the operation as translating objects by a vector, with an optional copy behavior. It distinguishes from rotate/scale/mirror by naming 'Translate ... by a vector,' but it does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling tools like rhino_move_objects_to_layer or rhino_cmd_move.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Among a very large sibling set of transform and move tools, the description leaves selection entirely to inference and does not explain when copy mode should be used.

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