config_profiles_reorder

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is partially covered. Beyond that, the description says nothing about whether the supplied list must contain all profiles or only the moved ones, whether positions are absolute or relative, or whether the operation is idempotent — all material for a mutation tool.

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?

At three words it is maximally front-loaded and wastes nothing, but this is under-specification rather than true conciseness — the brevity removes information the agent needs rather than trimming redundant text.

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?

For a mutation tool with an undocumented nested-array payload, no output schema, and annotations covering only read/write safety, the description should at minimum explain the reorder semantics (full ordering vs. partial moves). It is not complete enough to call the tool confidently.

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% for the single, non-trivial "items" array parameter. The description never mentions the uuid/viewPosition payload, its ordering semantics, or the maximum position range, so it fails to compensate for the schema's silence on meaning.

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 pairs a specific verb ("Reorder") with a specific resource ("config profiles"), so an agent knows the operation type without opening the schema. It does not differentiate itself from config_profiles_update or explain that this affects display/ordering position, so it falls short of a 5.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus config_profiles_update or the other *_reorder siblings. The name implies a reordering intent, but the description offers no prerequisites, no conditions, and no exclusions.

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