reorder_effects

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

No annotations are present, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether the tool is destructive, synchronous, or returns a result. It does not mention side effects, permissions, or error conditions. The description adds no value beyond the tool name.

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 extremely short, but conciseness is achieved at the expense of essential information. Every sentence should earn its place, but this single sentence is insufficient to guide the agent. The structure is under-specified and lacks clarity.

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?

Given the tool has six parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is completely inadequate. It does not explain how to identify the target layer or effect, the meaning of indices, or the behavior when indices are invalid. The agent cannot use this tool reliably.

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 0%, and the description provides no explanation of the six parameters. The agent cannot infer what 'compId', 'compName', 'newIndex', 'layerName', 'layerIndex', or 'effectIndex' represent or how they relate. The description fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 'Reorder effects on a layer' is minimally clear, essentially restating the tool name. It specifies the resource (effects on a layer) but does not elaborate on the scope or distinguish from related tools like 'modify_effect_properties' or 'list_effects'. The purpose is understood but not enriched.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'modify_effect_properties' or 'apply_effect'. The description lacks any context about prerequisites, required order of operations, or when not to use it. The agent has no decision support.

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