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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds that the operation changes display order based on a code sequence, but it does not disclose whether all answer codes must be supplied or how partial/unknown codes are treated. It does not contradict the annotations.

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 that states the action, the target resource, and the key input method with zero filler. Every word contributes meaning.

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?

The tool is simple, the schema covers all three required parameters, and the annotations clarify idempotency and non-destructive behavior. The only notable omission is whether the codes array must enumerate every existing answer option, but overall the agent has enough information to call the tool successfully.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage: survey_id and qid are linked to list tools, and codes is described as 'Answer code' items with the ordering intent in the parameter description. The tool description only restates the ordering concept and adds no new parameter meaning beyond the schema.

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 ('Set') with a clear resource ('display order of a question's answers') and the mechanism ('listing their codes in order'). It is immediately distinguishable from siblings like add_answer_option, remove_answer_option, update_answer_option, and reorder_questions.

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 usage context is implied: you use this when you want to reorder existing answer options. However, the description does not explicitly say when not to use it or contrast it with add/remove/update_answer_option, so the agent must infer the appropriate selection from the sibling names.

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