nexterm_reposition_script

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

Annotations already disclose that this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent, open-world operation that is not destructive, but the description adds little behavioral context. It does not explain what ordering effect occurs on the target script, whether the operation is reversible, or how organization scoping affects behavior.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. However, its brevity comes at the cost of omitted operational detail rather than being efficiently complete.

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 three-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and no parameter descriptions, the description is too thin. It leaves key questions unanswered about ordering semantics, organization scoping, and the effect on the target script.

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 carry the full burden of explaining script_id, target_id, and organization_id. The phrase 'relative to another script' only hints that target_id is an anchor; it does not clarify whether the script is placed before, after, or otherwise positioned relative to the target, and it says nothing about organization_id.

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 and resource: reordering a Nexterm script relative to another script. It is clear enough to distinguish from most CRUD siblings, but it does not differentiate itself from nexterm_reposition_entry or nexterm_reposition_snippet, which are similarly named repositioning tools.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as nexterm_update_script or the sibling reposition tools. It also does not mention prerequisites like organization scoping or what 'relative to another script' implies operationally.

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