skylight_move_list_item

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the mutation safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds nothing beyond that: it doesn't say whether the move is scoped to a frame, whether it changes the item's container, or whether other items shift positions as a side effect.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with zero padding, which is structurally clean. The brevity here reflects under-specification rather than deliberate economy, so it cannot score higher despite the tight wording.

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 mutation tool with four parameters, low schema coverage, no output schema, and a rich set of sibling item tools, the definition is far too thin. Missing are the frame/list scoping relationship, the effect on ordering of other items, and any indication of required identifiers beyond the required list.

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 only 25% — just afterItemId carries a description in the schema. The description adds no meaning for listId, itemId, or frameId, and frameId in particular is undocumented in both the schema and the prose, so the agent cannot tell what role it plays in a move operation.

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 names a specific verb (reorder) and resource (list item), so its core purpose is unambiguous. However, it gives no differentiation from siblings that also reposition list items, such as skylight_update_list_item or skylight_set_list_item_section, leaving the agent to guess which of the several item-mutating tools applies.

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 description contains no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. With many sibling tools that mutate list items, an agent receives no signal about when reordering is the right call versus update_list_item or set_list_item_section.

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