Move flows into a folder

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint: false), the description adds valuable behavioral details: it does not change what a flow does ('keeps its cards'), running flows stay running, and the previous folder is reported for undo purposes. This gives the agent a richer understanding of the operation's persistence and side effects.

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 compact and well-structured: sentence 1 states the primary action, sentence 2 clarifies input format, and sentence 3 explains side effects and reversibility. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

The tool is simple (move flows) and has no output schema. The description covers all essential aspects: what changes (location only), what stays the same (cards and running state), and recoverability (old folder reported). This is complete for the tool's complexity, especially given the sibling landscape.

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 already describes both parameters with 100% coverage: flows by id or exact name, folder by id or exact name with null meaning removal. The description reiterates these points but does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage is appropriate.

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 action: 'Moves one or more flows into a folder, or out of every folder when folder is null.' It identifies the resource (flows) and destination (folder), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like homey_flow_delete or homey_flow_folder_update by focusing solely on relocation.

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 the tool (for moving flows between folders) and mentions input format (ids or exact names), but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools for other operations. This meets the level of 'clear context, no exclusions'.

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