basecamp_move_card

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'move' and 'status change,' but omits details like required permissions, side effects on card position, whether the move is reversible, or what happens to watchers. Minimal behavioral context for a mutation tool.

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 one short sentence with no wasted words. It is concise and front-loaded, but the parenthetical '(status change)' is arguably redundant. Still, it earns its place as a compact statement.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain required inputs, return values, or any edge cases. The context of sibling tools and complexity demand much more detail.

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 schema covers 50% of parameters (position and to_column have descriptions), but card_id and project_id are left unexplained. The description does not compensate by explaining these values or their roles. It only mentions 'card' and 'column' generally, adding no meaning beyond the field names.

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 tool's function: moving a card to a different column. It uses a specific verb+resource and includes a clarifying parenthetical. It is distinct from sibling tools like move_column or update_card because it explicitly targets cards.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or scenarios where another tool (e.g., update_card) might be more appropriate. It only states what it does, not when to choose it.

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