move_path

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

The description only indicates a mutation operation but fails to disclose critical behaviors like overwrite rules, error handling, permission requirements, or whether cross-filesystem moves are supported. With no annotations, the description fully neglected behavioral context.

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 short sentence, which is under-specified for the tool's complexity. It is concise but at the expense of necessary details, making it unsuitable for effective tool selection.

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 tool with 2 required params that performs a destructive operation, the description is drastically insufficient. It omits return values, error cases, overwrite behavior, and any usage context, leaving the agent to guess.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage and the tool description does not explain the parameters. sourcePath and destinationPath are left to be inferred from names only, with no constraints, formats, or examples provided.

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 the tool moves or renames a file/folder, which is clear and distinguishes it from many sibling tools like delete_path or write_file. However, it lacks specificity about whether renaming is a subset of moving and does not address potential ambiguities.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as copy operations or direct manipulation. There are no usage exclusions or context that would help an agent decide.

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