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

Annotations provide idempotentHint=false, but the description adds important behavioral detail: omitting an active account retains its current order (non-deterministic unless full list passed), and failure occurs if any id is not active. This adds context beyond annotations, though it doesn't mention auth requirements 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?

The description is front-loaded with the core action, then param constraints, then return format. Every sentence adds value without 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?

Given one parameter, no output schema, and no enums, the description covers the essential behavior and return shape. It could mention whether the operation is atomic or what happens on partial success, but otherwise it's complete.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains that account_ids should be the full list in top-to-bottom order, that every id must be an active account, and that omission keeps current order. This is substantial semantic detail beyond the schema's bare array definition.

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 (reorder/set display order) and resource (user's accounts) with precise scope ('dashboard display order'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like update_account or list_accounts by focusing solely on ordering.

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?

It implicitly covers when to use this tool (to set display order) but doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions. For example, it doesn't clarify that this is not for updating account properties, which a sibling update_account does.

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