hosts_reorder_hosts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. "POST" implies a mutation, but nothing is disclosed about what is changed, whether ordering is global or scoped, side effects on existing hosts, or permissions required. The confirm/preview behavior is only documented in the schema in Russian, not in the description.

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?

It is short, but the content is an unedited OpenAPI dump: an HTTP method plus path and a "Tags: Hosts Controller" line that carries no meaning for an agent. The useful statement ("Reorder hosts") is present but there is no restructuring or added value, so brevity comes from under-specification rather than conciseness.

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 a nested-object body, a confirmation parameter, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It gives the agent nothing beyond the endpoint signature to call this mutation tool correctly.

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 only 50% — the nested body.hosts array (uuid + viewPosition pairs) is undocumented, and the description adds nothing about it. The one documented parameter (confirm) is described only in the schema, not the description, so the description does not compensate for the coverage gap on a complex nested payload.

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?

"Reorder hosts" names a verb and a resource, so the basic operation is inferable, but it is essentially the tool name normalized (hosts_reorder_hosts → Reorder hosts). It offers no scope detail — what ordering means, whether it affects view order globally, or how it differs from hosts_update_host or the other reorder_* sibling tools.

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 when-to-use guidance at all. The agent is not told when reordering hosts is appropriate, what prerequisites exist (e.g., that hosts must exist), or how this relates to the similarly named reorder tools for nodes, squads, or config profiles.

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