sdcloud_move_firewall_policy_rule_in_group

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only states 'move (reorder)' but does not disclose side effects (e.g., change requires deployment, effect on rule order, error conditions like invalid position). This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 a single sentence, concise and to the point. However, it could be improved by adding a brief note about position indexing or deployment necessity without losing conciseness.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and only 40% schema coverage, the description lacks essential context. It does not explain the reordering mechanics, that position is 1-based, or that the change is not effective until the policy is deployed. The agent may miss important workflow steps.

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 covers only 40% of parameters (scope and position). The description adds no further parameter context beyond what the schema already provides. Three of five parameters (rule_uuid, group_uuid, policy_uuid) have no description and are not elaborated.

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 ('move/reorder') and the resource ('a single rule within its firewall policy rule group'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create, read, update, delete, and bulk_move, which handle multiple rules.

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 this tool (reorder a rule within a group), but does not provide explicit guidance on alternatives like bulk_move for multiple rules, or prerequisites (e.g., policy must exist). No when-not-to-use indications.

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