Reorder menu items

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

Annotations already indicate the tool is not read-only and not destructive, and the description adds that the operation applies to several items at once. However, it does not disclose response behavior, partial failure handling, or whether the operation is atomic, leaving some behavioral uncertainty.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and includes a brief value statement. No wasted words, and the sibling comparison earns its place by clarifying usage.

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 simple two-parameter schema and full schema coverage, the description is nearly sufficient. It lacks details about return values or error scenarios, but for a straightforward bulk reorder tool the available information is adequate.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents the parameters. The description's 'order and nesting' phrasing loosely maps to menu_order and parent, but adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Set the order and nesting of several menu items at once.' This clearly identifies the tool's function and distinguishes it from single-item operations like update_menu_item.

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 phrase 'far less error-prone than updating them one by one' signals when this tool is preferable, implying a bulk reorder use case versus individual updates. It provides context but does not explicitly state exceptions or when to prefer the single-item sibling.

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