move_table_row

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

With no annotations the description carries the full burden, and it discloses meaningful traits: no-op at the table boundary, session-local form state that must be verified in the same session, and a return shape {base_button, target_button, accepted}. These go well beyond a restatement of the name.

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 action is front-loaded in the first sentence, but the passage is a dense single paragraph crowded with internal fixture identifiers (PF_MOVE_ROW_UP, ДанныеФормыКоллекция.Сдвинуть) that add implementation noise without helping selection.

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 values need not be spelled out (though they are). Combined with the prerequisite, boundary no-op behavior, and same-session verification guidance, the definition is nearly complete for this 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for all four parameters. It clarifies the key parameter – direction in {"up","down"} with a worked example – but host, port, and capture remain completely undocumented in both schema and 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?

It states a specific verb and resource – 'Move the ACTIVE table row up or down' – and the word 'move' distinct from siblings copy_table_row, delete_table_row, and add_table_row. The purpose is clear, though it is embedded in heavy fixture jargon that partially obscures the plain meaning.

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?

It gives an explicit precondition ('Select the target row first with select_table_row') and states the verification path ('verify in the SAME session via assert_form_value'). It does not explicitly contrast with copy/delete/add alternatives, but the context of use is clear.

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