reorder_nodes

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

Adds behavior beyond annotations: mentions skipping detached nodes and the return format ({ ok, affected }). Annotations indicate it's a non-destructive mutation, consistent with description.

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, no wasted words. Front-loaded with the action and key detail about z-order.

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 no output schema, it succinctly describes the return shape. Explains all critical behaviors for a simple reorder operation.

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 has 100% coverage but description adds value: clarifies index as z-order bottom and explains that detached nodes in nodeIds are skipped, which is not in the schema.

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 tool reorders nodes within their current parent using an index (0=bottom), distinguishing it from siblings like 'reparent_nodes' or 'move_nodes'.

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 vs alternatives. While it's clear that this only works within the same parent, it doesn't mention that 'reparent_nodes' should be used for moving between parents.

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