create_asset_movement

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states only that the tool creates a movement, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as authorization requirements, side effects (e.g., whether the asset's quantity is updated), idempotency, or rate limits.

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?

Single sentence with 11 words, front-loading the purpose. No wasted words or redundant information.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should cover what the tool returns and any prerequisites (e.g., asset must exist). It lacks this context, leaving the agent uncertain about the response and preconditions.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage on all 6 parameters, so the schema already documents parameter meaning. The description adds minimal extra value (only the 'dispatch note, transfer' hint), so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'create a new asset movement' with parenthetical clarification '(dispatch note, transfer)', using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like cancel_asset_movement, close_asset_movement, and list_asset_movements.

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 explicit guidance on when to use or when not to use this tool versus alternatives. The usage is implied by the description and tool name, but there is no mention of prerequisites or exclusions.

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