nc-mcp-server

reorder_questions

Idempotent

Reorder questions on a form by providing the form ID and a list of question IDs in the desired order. Returns the updated order for each question.

Instructions

Reorder the questions on a form. Must list every question id exactly once.

Args: form_id: Numeric form id. new_order: Array of question ids in the desired order.

Returns: JSON with the updated order for each question id.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "form_id": "<form_id>",
      "new_order": "<new_order>"
    },
    "name": "reorder_questions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`form_id`	Yes
`new_order`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.7.0Sep 21, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description adds the critical behavioral rule that every question id must be listed exactly once, and states the return value. With annotations already providing idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, this extra constraint is useful context and does not contradict them.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short and front-loaded with the purpose and the key constraint, followed by a compact Args/Returns structure. Every sentence contributes actionable information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple reorder tool with output schema and annotations present, the description covers the operation, the parameters' semantics, and the critical permutation constraint. No essential information for correct invocation is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description takes on full parameter explanation. It clarifies form_id as numeric and, more importantly, defines new_order as 'Array of question ids in the desired order' and adds the essential 'exactly once' requirement.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific action and resource: 'Reorder the questions on a form.' It is clear, but it does not explicitly differentiate from the closely named sibling reorder_options, relying on the tool name for that distinction.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied by the verb 'Reorder' and the constraint 'Must list every question id exactly once' gives a practical requirement, but the description gives no when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives such as reorder_options.

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

Deploy Server