Move Document

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that the tool 'updates the document's folder assignment,' implying a mutation, but fails to disclose critical behavioral traits such as required permissions, whether the move is reversible, potential side effects (e.g., impact on linked content), or error conditions. This leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded, with the core purpose stated first ('Move a document to a folder'), followed by a usage note and behavioral detail. Every sentence earns its place by adding value, and there is no redundant or verbose language.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It covers the basic purpose and one parameter nuance but lacks details on permissions, error handling, return values, or side effects. While concise, it does not provide enough context for safe and effective use by an AI 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for 'new_parent_id' by explaining that setting it to null moves the document to root level, which clarifies the parameter's semantics beyond the schema. However, it does not provide context for 'graph_id' or 'document_id,' leaving two of the three parameters without additional explanation, resulting in a baseline score.

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 specific action ('Move a document to a folder') and resource ('document'), distinguishing it from siblings like move_folder or move_artifact. It also specifies the scope of the operation ('updates the document's folder assignment in workspace navigation'), making the purpose 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 provides clear context on when to use this tool ('Move a document to a folder') and includes a specific usage note ('Set new_parent_id to null to move to root level (unfiled)'). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like move_folder for different resource types, which prevents a perfect score.

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