set_tab_order

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the side effect of writing each visual's layouts[0].position.tabOrder and explains that visuals not listed keep their order. This adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond just stating 'set'.

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, front-loaded with the purpose, and includes a concrete spec for the key parameter. Every sentence earns its place with no fluff or redundancy.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, the description explains what it does, how it works, and the effect on unlisted visuals. It does not discuss error handling or prerequisites, but given the simplicity, it is adequately complete.

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?

The description explicitly defines visualOrder as a comma-separated list of visual names, adding valuable format detail not in the schema. While reportSessionId has no description in either schema or description, the other two parameters are well covered, giving a score above baseline.

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 identifies the tool as setting the keyboard tab order of a page's visuals, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool set_page_tab_order by explicitly focusing on visual-level tab order, and provides the exact data format.

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 provides clear context: it is for keyboard accessibility, setting the order a keyboard user tabs through visuals. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but the context is strong enough to guide appropriate usage.

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