move_task

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and includes important behavioral details: the resulting top-level/subtask state and the not-found error when any ID does not exist. It could disclose more about side effects on existing subtasks or permissions, but the core behavior and failure mode are transparent.

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?

Two sentences deliver purpose, the two modes, the exclusivity rule, and the error behavior with no filler. The key action and the exactly-one constraint are front-loaded.

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 three-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter semantics, the required constraint, and error behavior. It does not describe return values or potential side effects on subtasks, but these are minor given the tool's simplicity.

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 explains the meaning of projectId and parentTaskId and the exclusivity constraint, which the raw schema does not convey. The id parameter is implied by 'Move a task' and is marked required in 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 names the exact verb ('Move'), the resource ('a task'), and the two modes: moving to a different project as a top-level task or making it a subtask. It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling move_project because it targets tasks, not projects.

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 explicitly states when to use projectId versus parentTaskId and the 'Exactly one' exclusivity rule. It does not name alternative sibling tools or excluded scenarios, but the usage context is sufficiently clear for an agent to select this tool over move_project.

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