Move File

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: the operation fails if the destination already exists and both paths must remain within allowed directories. It does not discuss atomicity, rollback, or detailed error cases, but it covers the most important invocation constraints.

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 action and appropriately sized for a simple file operation. There is some redundancy between saying it can move/rename in one operation and later saying it works across directories for simple renaming, but the structure remains clear and efficient.

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 two-parameter mutation tool with annotations and no output schema, the description is largely complete: it covers purpose, failure behavior, directory-scope constraints, and common use cases. Minor gaps remain around source existence and error handling, but nothing critical for basic invocation is missing.

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 references both parameters by name and clarifies that they must be within allowed directories, and the destination must not already exist. However, it does not define path formats, source existence requirements, or individual parameter roles in depth.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Move or rename files and directories.' It also distinguishes moving between directories from simple renaming within the same directory, which clarifies the tool's scope without needing to open the schema.

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?

It gives usage context such as 'works across different directories' and 'can be used for simple renaming within the same directory,' plus the constraint that the destination must not exist. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or say when to use this instead of siblings like write_file or edit_file.

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