Reorder section

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as the effect on other sections' ordering, whether the operation is atomic, side effects, error cases (e.g., invalid gid), or if the operation can be undone. The description lacks crucial context for a mutation tool.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the purpose. It is appropriately short and wastes no words, earning a high score for conciseness.

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 (4 parameters, 2 required, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficient. It does not explain the behavior when both after_section and before_section are provided, the return value (if any), or error states. A more complete description would cover these aspects.

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 the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides (the parameters are already well-documented with 'gid' lookup instructions). No contribution is made by the description for parameters.

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 verb (Move) and resource (an existing section) and specifies the scope (within its project). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like section_create, section_update, and project_list_sections, though it could more explicitly contrast with those.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like section_update (which also changes section position) or explain prerequisites or limitations. There is no mention of what 'reorder' means in the context of the sibling tools.

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