modifier.move

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

Annotations provide no safety hints (all false), so the description must disclose effects. 'Risk: standard; maturity: L3' gives generic risk/version info but no detail on what reordering a modifier changes, whether it requires object selection, or how scene revision is enforced. No contradiction with annotations, but minimal substance.

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?

Two short sentences with zero waste, but the space is wasted on generic metadata rather than a purpose statement. Under-specification cannot be rewarded as 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?

This is a mutating operation with 8 parameters accompanied by a minimal description and hollow annotations. There's no statement of effect, prerequisites, or return behavior, so an agent cannot decide how to call it 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 description coverage is 38% (3/8 params have inline descriptions). The description names no parameters and explains none of the core ones (modifierName, targetIndex, objectId, name). It fails to compensate for the schema's sparse 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 identifies the tool as 'PartMe Blender Harness command `modifier.move`' but never states what moving a modifier means (reordering the modifier stack) or names the resource affected. This essentially restates the tool name with metadata, providing near-tautological clarity.

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 exists on when to invoke this tool vs sibling modifier tools (blender_modifier_add, blender_modifier_configure, blender_modifier_remove). The only usage-ish sentence says 'Per-request argument checks and session policy still apply', which is about invocation constraints, not selection.

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