move_items_to_grid_container_by_column

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the auto-positioning behavior ('Fills down columns before moving to next column') and return values ('Success status and final positions of moved items'), which is helpful. However, it lacks details on permissions, error conditions, or side effects (e.g., whether items are removed from original locations), leaving gaps for a mutation tool.

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 well-structured with clear sections (purpose, usage, behavior, returns) in four concise sentences. Each sentence adds value, though it could be slightly more front-loaded by integrating usage into the purpose statement.

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's complexity (6 parameters, mutation operation) and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It covers behavior and returns well (aided by the output schema), but the lack of parameter explanations and minimal usage guidance makes it inadequate for full understanding, especially compared to siblings like 'move_items_to_grid_container_by_row'.

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 mentions no parameters explicitly, failing to explain what 'target_container_id', 'item_ids', or the column/row parameters mean. This leaves 6 parameters undocumented, significantly hindering understanding despite the output schema covering return values.

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 ('Moves items to grid container') and specifies the filling pattern ('filling positions column by column'), which distinguishes it from row-based alternatives. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'move_items_to_specific_grid_locations' which might be a closer sibling, making it slightly less specific than ideal.

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?

The description provides some context with 'Alternative filling pattern for specific experimental layouts', implying this is for column-first layouts rather than row-first. It doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name alternatives like 'move_items_to_grid_container_by_row', leaving usage somewhat implied rather than explicit.

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