Move / rename

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

Annotations already mark this as a non-read-only, non-idempotent operation, and the description confirms the move semantics. However, it does not disclose edge-case behaviors such as failure when the destination exists without autorename, or what happens to shared links/source data.

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, clear sentence with no redundant wording. It efficiently captures the core operation without unnecessary detail.

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 description is adequate for a simple file operation, especially with a fully documented schema and mutation annotations. However, there is no output schema and no guidance on return values, conflict behavior, or when move should be preferred over copy/delete.

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 100% parameter description coverage, including the rename semantics of to_path and the autorename behavior. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 specific verbs 'Move or rename' and clearly states the resource type ('file or folder') and the operation direction ('from one path to another'). This is distinct from sibling tools like dropbox_copy or dropbox_delete.

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 for relocating or renaming items, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus dropbox_copy, which is a likely alternative. There is no exclusions or 'when-not-to-use' guidance.

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