Reorder credentials

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds that it 'Sets a manual sortOrder', which clarifies the mutation is a metadata update rather than a destructive operation. It doesn't disclose edge cases like whether partial positions are allowed or whether unlisted credentials are reordered to the end, but the annotations cover the safety profile.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the action and the second provides the UI context and mechanism. Every word earns its place.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is reasonably complete: it names the resource, the scope (same folder), and the UI trigger. However, it doesn't specify the expected format or constraints of the positions array beyond what the schema shows, and it doesn't state whether the operation is atomic or how it interacts with existing sort orders. Given the tool's simplicity, this is adequate but not rich.

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 'positions' is an array of id/sortOrder pairs, but it doesn't explain the semantics of sortOrder values (e.g., whether they are 0-based, whether they must be contiguous, or what happens to credentials not listed). The description adds the 'manual sortOrder' context but leaves the exact contract to the agent.

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') and resource ('credentials'), and adds the key scoping detail that it operates 'within the same folder' and is used by drag-to-reorder in the sidebar's manual sort mode. This distinguishes it from the sibling reorder tools (termix_hosts_reorder_folders, termix_hosts_reorder_hosts, termix_snippets_reorder_snippets) by naming the resource, though it doesn't explicitly name those siblings.

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 implies when to use it: when reordering credentials in the sidebar's manual sort mode. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools. The sibling list contains other reorder tools, but the description doesn't reference them, so an agent must infer the boundary from the resource name.

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