update_library_sections_by_section_id_move

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

Annotations already convey the safety profile (not read-only, not destructive, idempotent). The description adds only the endpoint and the phrase 'Move Section', without explaining what moving entails, what changes, or what side effects occur. It does not contradict annotations but also does not enrich them.

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 terse and clearly structured with a title, endpoint, and args section. There is no wasted wording, though the Args block partially duplicates schema information and the brevity borders on under-specification.

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 simple one-parameter tool with an output schema and annotations, this is minimally usable. However, it lacks operational context about what 'move' actually does and when it should be chosen over the many similar update/move sibling tools, leaving meaningful gaps for an agent.

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. It gives a minimal explanation of section_id as 'the unique identifier of the library section', which is helpful but adds little beyond the schema's type and title. No format, source, or constraints are provided.

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 names the operation ('Move Section') and the resource (library section), and the endpoint reinforces the intent. It distinguishes itself from the generic update_library_sections_by_section_id via the move suffix, but it doesn't explicitly differentiate among the many sibling move tools.

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 alternatives. It doesn't explain that this is for reordering/moving a library section, nor does it mention any conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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