mod_reorder

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

Annotations already mark the tool as destructive and not read-only. The description adds useful context that reordering changes the final result, which aligns with the destructive hint. It does not disclose additional side effects, undo behavior, or failure modes, but the annotation coverage lowers the burden.

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 compact and front-loaded with the operation and critical index convention. The bilingual format is efficient, and every sentence adds relevant information without unnecessary elaboration.

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 tool with only three parameters, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description provides enough context to call the tool correctly. It explains the position convention and outcome significance, though it does not cover potential errors or confirm the return value.

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?

The schema covers all three parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is met. The description adds extra meaning by clarifying that index 1 is the bottom of the stack and closest to the base, which is not fully stated in the schema's parameter description.

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' with the resource 'modifier' and the target 'stack position', making the operation unambiguous. It also explains the index convention. It does not explicitly name sibling tools, but the action is distinct from mod_add, mod_remove, and mod_disable.

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 implies usage when modifier order matters by noting that 'order strongly affects the final result.' However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives such as mod_add or mod_remove, leaving the selection strategy mostly to inference.

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