Move or reorder a card

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so: it discloses fractional-index position minting (no collisions), that wipLimit is advisory and not enforced server-side, that sortMode lists override the requested slot, and that card numbers are per-board and change on cross-board moves. This is unusually rich behavioral detail.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then anchor semantics, then caveats. Dense but every sentence adds operational value; no filler.

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?

Covers required and optional params, side effects on card numbering, sortMode interaction, and points to kanbini_get_card for observing the new number, which substitutes for the absent output schema. Nothing needed to invoke correctly is missing.

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, and it defines toListId, beforeId, and afterId precisely, including the null/omit semantics and the geometric meaning (ABOVE/BELOW). Only the id parameter is left implicit, which is self-evident.

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?

States a specific verb pair (move/reorder) and resource (card), and immediately scopes both modes: between lists or within the current list. Clearly distinct from siblings like kanbini_update_card or kanbini_move_list.

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?

Explicitly explains when to pass beforeId vs afterId, that null/omit means start/end of list, and gives a precondition to check (destination list's wipLimit card count) before moving. The agent knows exactly how to choose anchors.

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