reorder_phases

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It states the effect ('the plan's sort order is updated to match'), but does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., whether old order is overwritten, if partial lists are rejected) or permissions needed. Adequate but not detailed.

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 two sentences, no unnecessary words. The first sentence explains what the tool does; the second provides usage instruction. Highly concise and front-loaded.

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 simple reorder tool with 3 parameters, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description covers the main action and key constraint (full list). It could mention validation or error cases, but overall it is sufficiently complete for an AI agent to use correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context: 'Provide the full list of phase IDs in the desired order' reinforces the schema's 'typically the full set' note and clarifies that a partial list may not be accepted. This adds value beyond 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 action ('Reorder the phases in a workflow's project plan') and specifies the resource ('phases in a workflow's project plan'). The name 'reorder_phases' is self-explanatory. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'add_phase' and 'delete_phase' by focusing on ordering.

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 implies when to use (to change phase order) and instructs to provide the full list of phase IDs. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare it to alternatives (e.g., updating individual phase statuses). The guidance is clear but minimal.

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