move_filter_rule

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

The description adds parameter-specific notes about rule_id format ('*1' or '0') and destination being 0-based, which complements the annotations (idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false). It does not contradict annotations. It does not go deeper into side effects, but with annotations present, this is sufficient.

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?

Description is two sentences plus a compact bullet-like Notes section. Every line adds value; no filler or repetition of schema information.

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?

The description fully covers the operation and its two required parameters. Since an output schema exists, return value descriptions are unnecessary. It even tells the user where to obtain rule_id ('from list output'). For a simple move operation with good annotations, this is complete.

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 0% in the description text, but the description's Notes section provides concrete examples and semantics for both required params: rule_id uses list output IDs like '*1' or '0', destination is a 0-based index. This goes well beyond the schema's minimal titles.

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 uses a specific verb 'Moves' and identifies the resource 'firewall filter rule' and action 'to a different position in the chain'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_filter_rule (edits properties) or remove_filter_rule (deletes).

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 explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use are mentioned. The description implies usage via the verb 'Moves' and parameter notes, but it does not contrast with move_nat_rule or explain when to use this versus update_filter_rule. Context is understandable but not explicit.

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