sql_editor_tab_reorder

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

Annotations give only readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description must supply the rest. It says nothing about what happens to tabs omitted from the list, whether the ordering is atomic, or whether the mutation is reversible.

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?

A single short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Efficient, though its brevity reflects under-specification rather than disciplined economy.

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 mutation tool with no output schema and only minimal annotations, the definition is too thin. It omits the behavior for partial/invalid id lists and any confirmation of effect, which an agent needs before invoking a reorder operation.

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% and the single 'order' parameter has no schema description. The parenthetical '(tab ids)' does clarify that the array holds tab identifiers in the desired sequence, but the key semantic questions (must every open tab be listed? what if an id is unknown?) remain unanswered.

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?

States a specific verb (reorder) and resource (SQL Editor tabs), clearly distinguishing the action from siblings like sql_editor_tab_close or sql_editor_tab_activate. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the action is 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?

No indication of when to use this versus the other tab tools, nor prerequisites (e.g., must the tabs exist first, does it need a saved session). The description only restates the action.

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