todoist_projects_reorder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'reorder' (an update operation) but does not explain side effects (e.g., what happens if child_order values conflict) or prerequisites (e.g., whether the user needs write access). The description is too minimal 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?

Two concise sentences: the first states the action, the second provides context (sidebar ordering). No filler 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is adequate but not thorough. It fails to explain what 'new positions' means (0-indexed?), how conflicting child_order values are resolved, or what the response looks like. A more complete description would cover these details.

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 input schema has 100% coverage, describing both 'id' and 'child_order'. The description merely echoes 'specifying their new positions', adding no new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's action: 'Reorder projects by specifying their new positions' and pinpoints the context ('Controls project ordering in the sidebar'). This distinguishes it from similar sibling tools that reorder tasks or sections.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like todoist_task_reorder or todoist_sections_reorder. The purpose is implicitly clear, but no when-to-use or when-not-to-use context is given.

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