Reorder roles

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it's 'in one call' and explains hierarchy, but lacks details on side effects, permissions required, or how conflicting moves are resolved. Behavioral transparency is minimal beyond annotations.

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 unnecessary words. The key information is front-loaded. Every sentence adds value.

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 the tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description is mostly adequate. However, it omits what the tool returns (if anything), and how multiple moves are processed (sequentially or atomically). Missing some context for a full understanding.

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 description explains that 'Higher positions sit higher in the list and outrank lower ones,' adding semantic meaning to the 'position' parameter beyond the schema (which only says minimum 1). This clarifies ordering logic.

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 clearly states the action ('Move roles to new hierarchy positions'), the resource ('roles'), and the effect ('higher positions sit higher and outrank lower ones'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like assign_role or remove_role.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., updating a single role position, bulk_update_roles). The description implies efficiency by saying 'in one call' but does not provide when-to-use or when-not-to-use criteria.

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