vk_put_migratio_49ef754325c0

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully notes that authentication is required and explains parameter aliases and multipart formatting. However, it does not disclose important behavioral traits such as whether the import overwrites existing data, what happens on failure, or the response format.

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 primary purpose and contains mostly relevant details. There is minor redundancy between the opening summary and the detailed import list, but overall every sentence earns its place and the structure is clear.

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 complexity of a multipart upload with file objects and no output schema, the description covers request semantics well, including authentication and required fields. However, it omits any mention of the response or error behavior, and lacks guidance on distinguishing this from other migration endpoints, leaving some uncertainty 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?

The schema already provides 100% coverage of the single 'form' parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining file object shape (filename, contentBase64, contentType), multi-file arrays, camelCase/snake_case aliases, and that path/query parameters are top-level fields, going beyond the schema.

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 imports WeKan board exports into Vikunja, enumerating specific content types (projects, tasks, labels, checklists, comments, attachments). It also names the exact REST endpoint (PUT /migration/wekan/migrate), distinguishing it from sibling migration and other 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?

The description makes clear this is for WeKan board imports via a specific proxy endpoint, providing context on when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative migration tools or when not to use this one, stopping short of full usage guidance.

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