epost_move_to_folder

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: idempotent (no-op if already filed), adds folder membership without removal unless remove_from is specified, and notes the side effect of bumping the document's position. No contradictions with structured data.

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 paragraph that front-loads the main action and gradually provides details. At about 100 words, it is fairly concise, though some phrasing like 'unticked in the same sheet' could be simplified. Overall, every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 is a mutation with no output schema, the description covers the core behavior, parameters, and side effects. It doesn't detail return values or error scenarios, but that is acceptable. The sibling list provides context for when this tool is appropriate.

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 only 25% (only remove_from has a description), so the description carries the burden. It explains the meaning of all four parameters: index as position in list, title as substring, folder as target, remove_from as old folder to drop. This compensates well for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 it files a Storage document into a custom folder, specifying the action, resource, and method of addressing (by index or substring). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like epost_create_folder and epost_unfile_from_folder by explaining it adds membership and is idempotent.

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?

Provides concrete usage context: how to address (index or substring), how to re-file using remove_from, and notes that filing bumps the document to top of 'Last used' order, requiring re-listing before next index. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives beyond the sibling list.

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