element_move

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds context about query-string transport and relationship to node_move, but does not elaborate on side effects, permissions, or idempotency behavior beyond what annotations imply.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and uses concise sentences to explain parameters, scope, and references. It is efficient but could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) for easier scanning.

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 description covers purpose, parameters, scope, and provides a documentation link. However, it lacks information about return values or error conditions, which would be helpful given no output schema exists. It adequately addresses tool usage context but misses some completeness for agent decision-making.

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?

With 80% schema description coverage, the description adds value by clarifying that page_id is a page id (not element id), explaining mutual exclusivity of before/after, and noting all params are optional except site and element_id. This goes beyond the schema descriptions, though format details for 'site' are missing.

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 tool re-orders or re-parents an element instance, specifying the HTTP method and path. It distinguishes from element_definitions (schema) and references sibling tools like elements_list and element_definitions_list, making the purpose specific and unambiguous.

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 explains when to supply parameters ('supply at least one of page_id, before, or after'), their roles, and mutual exclusivity. It also provides scope notes differentiating from element_definitions and suggests companion tools for discovery. However, it does not explicitly list scenarios where this tool should be avoided or compare to node_move.

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