google_forms_move_questionMove a Google Forms question to a new position by providing its form ID, question ID, and 0-based destination index.
Reorder a question to a new position in the form.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| formId | Yes | Form ID. | |
| account | No | Account nickname to use. | |
| newIndex | Yes | Destination item index (0-based). | |
| questionId | Yes | Question ID to move. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.60Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing beyond the basic action. It does not say whether other questions shift index, whether the move is reversible, what happens on an out-of-range newIndex, or what permissions are needed for a form mutation.
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 compact sentence with the action front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though it is perhaps too terse to carry additional needed context.
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?
Parameters are fully covered by the schema and there is no output schema to explain, so the only substantive gap is behavioral (index shifting, ordering side effects, error conditions). For a mutation tool with no annotations, the definition is minimally adequate but leaves that behavioral gap open.
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 100%, so formId, questionId, and newIndex are already documented (including the 0-based note and minimum 0). The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.
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 (a question within a form), clearly distinct from siblings like google_forms_update_question, add_question, and delete_question. It stops short of explicitly naming any alternative, but the resource+action pairing is unambiguous on its own.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this versus google_forms_update_question (which might also touch ordering) or how it relates to add/delete. The reordering intent is implied by the verb but no prerequisites or selection conditions are given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.