Move Connection

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'reposition' and reveals nothing about ordering semantics, side effects, permissions, mutation risk, idempotency, or response behavior. For a mutation tool this is a significant gap.

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 one short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. While it is structurally concise and easy to parse, the brevity comes at the expense of useful substance.

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?

Despite the moderate complexity of a three-parameter mutation with an enum and an optional position field, the description is largely uninformative. There is no output schema, no annotation layer, and no explanation of movement modes, constraints, or expected results, so an agent cannot reliably invoke this tool correctly.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the description adds no meaning to any parameter. It does not explain what `movement` values do, whether `position` is required for `insert_at`, or how `connection_id` identifies the item. An agent must guess the relationship between the 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 action ('reposition') and the resource ('a connection within a channel'), making the tool's basic purpose obvious. It is also distinguishable from sibling tools like connect_block and disconnect_connection, though it does not explicitly mention any competing reorder-like tool.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of when a sibling tool would be preferable. The context is implied at best: an agent should call this only when repositioning an existing connection, but nothing clarifies alternatives such as disconnect/connect or read-only inspection tools.

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