Move Tracker entity checklist item

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=true), so the bar is lower. The description adds that it returns the entity with the reordered checklist, useful because there is no output schema. However, it does not explain what happens when the 'before' target is omitted/null (presumably append to end), which is the key behavioral question for a reorder operation.

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 short sentences with zero waste: the action is front-loaded and the return behavior follows. Nothing is repeated from the title or schema.

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 nested-body mutation tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the action and the return shape, while annotations cover safety and the schema covers all inputs. The only real omission is the null/'before' positioning semantics, which is a minor gap.

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% and every parameter (including the nested 'before' field and the notify/notify_author defaults) is documented in the schema itself. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('Reorder a checklist item') and a precise resource scope ('within a Tracker entity's checklist'), which is enough to separate it from sibling mutation tools like tracker_entities_checklists_update_item or tracker_entities_checklists_update. It stops short of naming those siblings explicitly, so the differentiation is semantic rather than 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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no conditions that select this tool over the neighboring checklist tools (create/update/update_item/delete_item), and no prerequisites or constraints mentioned. Usage must be inferred entirely from the tool name and the word 'reorder'.

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