sb_move

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

Annotations already indicate this is a mutating, non-read-only operation (readOnlyHint=false) that is not flagged destructive. The description adds the exact behavior—reparenting and index placement—which goes beyond the bare flags. However, it does not disclose side effects such as reordering of siblings, required permissions, or the meaning of dry_run.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. Every word contributes to the action and target, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 simple action, the description plus schema is minimally sufficient: required parameters are clear and the operation is obvious. It is not complete as a standalone contract because dry_run behavior, return value/output, and guidance among sibling tools are absent, but the core invocation path is understandable.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must carry parameter meaning. It does map 'a node' to id, 'another parent' to parent_id, and 'at an index' to index. It leaves dry_run completely unexplained and the ordering semantics of index implicit, so compensation is only partial.

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 a specific operation ('Move'), a specific resource ('a node'), and the destination semantics ('to another parent at an index'). This is enough to distinguish sb_move from sibling mutation tools like sb_add, sb_set, sb_remove, and sb_duplicate without needing to open the schema.

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 gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. It relies entirely on the verb 'move' to imply the use case, which is below the level of clear context or exclusions.

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