Reorder a playlist

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

Beyond annotations declaring an idempotent, non-destructive, open-world mutation, the description adds the useful manual-sort compatibility constraint. It does not explain failure behavior for incompatible playlists, invalid-position handling, or how surrounding entries are shifted.

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 front-load the operation and immediately provide indexing and compatibility details. There is no filler or redundant restatement of structured fields.

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?

For a flat four-parameter reorder operation, the action, index convention, and principal prerequisite are sufficient for most selection and invocation decisions. Missing identifier guidance and edge-case behavior prevent it from being fully 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?

With only 25% schema description coverage, '(0 = first)' usefully adds zero-based indexing semantics for position, while the operation gives basic context for playlist and video_id. However, accepted playlist and video identifier formats remain undocumented, as does the valid upper bound for position relative to playlist length.

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 specifies the action, target, and scope: moving a video to a new position within a playlist. This clearly distinguishes reordering from siblings such as add_to_playlist, remove_from_playlist, and update_playlist.

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 statement 'Works for playlists sorted manually' supplies an important eligibility condition and implicitly warns against using it with other playlist orderings. It does not explain how to verify the sort mode or what alternative to use when that condition is unmet.

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