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

The description adds that verification_ids must contain every current item exactly once, which is a key behavioral constraint not fully captured by the readOnly/idempotent annotations. It does not describe error handling or side effects beyond the order specification.

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 concise, with no unnecessary words. It clearly states the action and the required input format in two short sentences.

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 reorder operation, the description is sufficient. It explains the requirement and order interpretation. It does not need details like permissions or return formats given the tool's simplicity and existing annotations.

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 parameter description in the schema already fully explains that it expects every current verification id in desired order. The tool description repeats this information without adding extra insight, so no additional value beyond schema coverage.

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?

Clearly states it sets the display order for portfolio items, which is a specific action distinct from siblings like add or remove. The verb 'Set' and resource 'display order' are explicit.

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?

Does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives like add_portfolio_item or update_portfolio_item. It provides the requirement that all items must be included, which implies a full reorder, but lacks explicit when-not guidance.

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