update_table_sorting_tool

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

The description discloses that data rows are reordered while the header row remains, and that it returns a JSON string with status and details. With no annotations, it provides adequate behavioral insight, though it omits potential side effects or permission requirements.

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 concise with a clear structure, including Args and Returns sections. However, the Args section redundantly lists parameters already defined in the schema, slightly reducing 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 the tool has 5 parameters with full schema coverage and an output schema, the description covers the main behavioral aspects and return format. It lacks error handling or prerequisite details, but is sufficient for a single-purpose mutation tool.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description repeats parameter descriptions from the schema without adding significant new meaning. The default value for sort_order is already in the schema, so the description adds marginal value.

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 it updates table sorting by a specific column, with explicit mention that the header row remains and data rows are reordered. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_table_column_tool or delete_table_records_tool.

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 explains what the tool does but does not provide guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, or when not to use it. It lacks explicit usage context, relying only on implicit purpose.

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