move_to_downloads

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('promote') but does not disclose whether items are removed from the linkgrabber, what happens for invalid IDs, or what the return value is. The 'resolved' precondition is helpful but incomplete.

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, front-loaded sentence with no fluff. It is concise and readable, though slightly undersized given the tool's behavioral complexity.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and only 0% parameter coverage, this description leaves major gaps: return values, side effects, selection behavior, and error handling are all omitted. It is not complete enough for reliable tool invocation.

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% and the description provides no parameter-level semantics. link_ids and package_ids are not explained—neither their relationship nor whether one is required over the other. The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds no meaning 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 uses a specific verb ('Promote') with a clear resource ('resolved linkgrabber items') and destination ('download queue'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like add_links, list_linkgrabber, and control_downloads.

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 word 'resolved' implies a precondition for use, but no explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios are given. It provides some implied usage context but lacks explicit guidance compared to sibling tools.

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