update_checklist_position

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavior. It essentially restates the action ('update the position') without disclosing additional traits such as how positions are interpreted, whether the API is idempotent, what the response format is, or any permission requirements. The word 'reorder' adds minimal context but doesn't expose potential side effects or constraints.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the action and a usage instruction. Every sentence earns its place with no 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?

The description gives the core purpose and when to use it, and the schema handles parameter documentation. However, there is no mention of return values (no output schema exists) or any preconditions, which leaves slight gaps for a tool with no annotations. Still, for a simple update operation, it is reasonably 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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters, each with descriptions (e.g., position accepts 'top', 'bottom', or a positive number). The description adds no additional parameter guidance, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the specific verb 'update' with the resource 'position of a checklist on a card', and explicitly states 'Use this tool to reorder checklists on a card.' This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like update_list_position (which reorders lists) and update_checklist_name (which renames).

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 description provides clear context: 'Use this tool to reorder checklists on a card.' This tells the agent when to invoke it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as noting that update_list_position handles list reordering, so it lacks exclusion guidance.

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