milestone_move_item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It states only the core effect and does not disclose side effects such as removal from the source milestone, permission requirements, or whether the item must already belong to a milestone. The audit-reason parameter hints at logging but does not explain enforcement.

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 compact: one clear imperative sentence followed by a minimal labeled argument list. Every sentence earns its place, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 three-parameter tool with an output schema, the description provides enough to invoke it correctly: the operation is clear and all parameters are explained. It lacks explicit alternative guidance and side-effect disclosure, but these are not critical to making a basic correct call.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the Args list compensates by giving every parameter meaningful semantics beyond the schema: item_ref gets a concrete example, to_milestone is specified as a slug, and reason is described as a one-line audit reason. It does not provide exhaustive constraints, but it covers all parameters clearly and briefly.

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 a specific verb ('Move') and resource ('an item to a different milestone'), and the item_ref example CB-5 clarifies the target. It is clear and not a tautology, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like milestone_add_item or milestone_set_status.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus milestone_add_item, milestone_set_status, or milestone_update. The description implies the context of moving items between milestones, but it provides no explicit prerequisites, alternatives, or exclusion conditions.

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