remarkable_move

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

Annotations mark this as a non-read, non-destructive operation. The description adds value by stating the item keeps its name and contents and explaining the '/' syntax, which goes beyond what annotations reveal. It does not cover error cases or permission requirements, but the core behavior is disclosed.

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 well-organized with usecase, instructions, parameters, and examples. Every section serves a purpose, and the examples are especially useful for an agent to pattern-match calls. No filler or redundancy.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values are covered. The description addresses the main behavior, the top-level special case, and parameter formats. It omits the compact_output parameter and error handling, but for a straightforward move tool this is largely sufficient.

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 coverage, the description must compensate. It explains 'item' as a name or full path and 'destination' as a folder path or '/' for top level, adding real meaning to the bare string types. However, the third parameter 'compact_output' is entirely unmentioned, leaving a gap.

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 verb ('move') and resource ('document or folder'), and clearly differentiates from siblings like remarkable_rename and remarkable_create_folder by naming the action. The usecase tag reinforces the core purpose without ambiguity.

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?

Instructions clarify how to use the tool, including the special '/' destination for top-level moves and the preservation of name/contents. It does not explicitly list when not to use it or alternative tools, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide when this is appropriate.

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