smartgym_reorder_routine

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

Annotations already flag destructive/non-idempotent/open-world. The description adds real behavioral context on top: dry_run=true (the default) sends NOTHING, omitted sections are left untouched, and every list must contain exactly that section's current ids — an important precondition that prevents partial or invalid rewrites.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then the constraint, then the dry-run safety note. No filler; every clause adds operational meaning.

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?

An output schema exists, so return formatting need not be described. With 5 params at 0% schema coverage and destructive annotations, the description covers the risky behavior and the id-list precondition well, though naming the section parameters explicitly would close the last gap.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden and largely does: it explains that the array parameters are per-section ordered id lists, constrains their contents, and defines the dry_run default and effect. It doesn't name main/warmup/cooldown explicitly or explain the routine identifier, so not fully compensating.

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+resource (reorder exercises within routine sections) and seeds the distinction from siblings by naming smartgym_move_exercise for section changes. It never explicitly ties 'sections' to the main/warmup/cooldown parameters, so the mapping requires a small inference.

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?

Gives a clear when-to-use-this vs when-to-use-something-else: reorder here, use smartgym_move_exercise to change an exercise's section. It also explains that omitted sections stay unchanged and that dry_run defaults to true, but it doesn't state prerequisites like needing the routine to already exist or requiring the exact current ids to be known first.

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