notes_move_note

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the operation is a move, but does not state whether the source note is removed, whether it replaces any existing destination note, whether attachments and metadata are preserved, or whether both target_folder_id and target_folder_name are needed or alternative paths.

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 containing no filler. It states the core operation and the key parameters with appropriate brevity.

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 has five parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and no detailed parameter guidance. The one-sentence description leaves important gaps: the roles of account_id/account_name, the relationship between target_folder_id and target_folder_name, and what happens during the move. This is insufficient for a five-parameter mutation tool.

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 add meaning to parameters. It clarifies that target_folder_id and target_folder_name specify the destination folder and that note_id identifies the note, but it ignores account_id and account_name entirely and does not explain how the two target folder parameters relate to each other.

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 is specific: 'Move a note to another folder' identifies the verb, resource, and result of the operation, and the mention of note_id plus target folder distinguishes it from note creation, deletion, update, and append operations. It clearly differentiates from all siblings.

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 implies the tool is used when relocating a note to another folder, which provides basic usage context. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives, no exclusions, and no mention of whether target_folder_id or target_folder_name are mutually exclusive or which is preferred.

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