qui_reorder_automations

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only describes how to call the endpoint. It does not mention that this is a mutating operation, what the effects are, auth requirements, or response characteristics, which is a critical gap.

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 that efficiently communicates the endpoint and general argument structure. It wastes no words, though it omits necessary detail for brevity.

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 empty schema and missing annotations, the description is incomplete. It fails to specify mandatory path variables, the request body shape, or expected outputs, making it insufficient for a tool with such low schema coverage.

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 schema provides zero property coverage, so the description must compensate. It adds a useful structural pattern (path variables in arguments, query in params, body in body), but it does not specify required fields like instanceID or the body's content for the new order, leaving the agent unable to construct a correct request.

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 identifies a specific endpoint for reordering automations, which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like qui_update_automation or qui_list_automations. However, it frames the action as 'call the endpoint' rather than stating the semantic effect (reordering automations), so it is clear but not fully explicit.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool or alternatives. It only gives invocation instructions, omitting context such as checking current order via qui_list_automations or prerequisites like an existing automation set.

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