dForms

Rename a folder

rename_folder

Idempotent

Rename a folder. Its forms stay in it. NAME_TAKEN when another folder already has that name.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "folder_id": "<folder_id>",
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "rename_folder"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	The folder name, 1 to 80 characters, unique in the workspace.
`folder_id`	Yes	The folder id, from list_folders.
`workspace_id`	No	The workspace this call acts in: an id from list_my_workspaces. Required for a person signed in with several workspaces and for staff of this deployment; optional with an API key or with only one workspace.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`folder`	Yes
`workspace`	Yes	The workspace this call acted in, to compare with the one the user means.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=false and idempotentHint=true, and the description adds real value on top: "Its forms stay in it" confirms that contained forms are preserved rather than orphaned, and "NAME_TAKEN when another folder already has that name" discloses the uniqueness precondition and its error code. It does not mention permission requirements, but the behavioral picture is otherwise solid.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the side-effect guarantee, then the failure mode. No filler and nothing redundant.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present and rich annotations, the description needn't explain return values or safety. It covers the mutation's effect on contained forms and the name-collision error, leaving only minor gaps such as permission requirements or case-sensitivity of the uniqueness check.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and every parameter (name, folder_id, workspace_id) is documented in the schema, including length bounds and workspace scoping rules. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb+resource pair, "Rename a folder," so the operation is unambiguous against siblings like create_folder and delete_folder. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from other siblings, but the verb is distinct enough that an agent can route correctly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives, and no prerequisites are given (for example that folder_id comes from list_folders). The only contextual hint is the NAME_TAKEN failure condition, which is a constraint rather than usage guidance.

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

All dForms tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?