vtable_drag_column

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It details the exact interaction sequence (click header, stepwise drag, release), internal API usage for positioning and verification, and the return payload including column order and dragHeaderMode diagnostics. It also states error conditions clearly.

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 dense and every sentence adds value, but it is presented as a long unbroken paragraph with semicolons, making it harder to parse. It is front-loaded with the core purpose but could benefit from bullet points or clearer separation of behavioral steps.

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 complexity (real mouse drag simulation) and the absence of annotations, the description covers prerequisites, execution method, verification details, return values, and error handling. The output schema exists, so return value details are not required in the description, but the description still provides sufficient context for safe usage.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains source/target accept column index or field name/title, and describes the position parameter via 'before/after'. However, the iframe_selector parameter is not addressed, leaving a gap for that input.

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 function: dragging a vtable column (source) before/after another column (target) using real mouse drag. It explicitly differentiates from sibling tools by emphasizing that it does not use instance APIs to change column positions, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 context on when to use this tool by explaining it simulates real mouse drag rather than using APIs, and it outlines prerequisites (e.g., dragHeaderMode must be enabled) and error conditions. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or provide exclusionary guidance, so it falls short of a 5.

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