Skip to main content
Glama

Rename workspace

rename_workspace
Destructive

Rename an existing workspace. Requires an owner or admin role in it (the same roles that may change its membership); an editor or viewer is refused. Takes the workspace id from list_workspaces. Touches only the label — membership, projects and roles are unchanged.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesNew human-readable name.
workspaceIdYesId of the workspace to rename (from list_workspaces).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYesWhether the call succeeded.
dataNoThe payload, shaped by the tool.
noteNoWhat to do next when not ready.
errorNoWhy it failed.
statusNoFor cache-backed readers: whether the answer was ready.
editorUrlNoOpens this project in the editor.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / anonymousToken
      Removed value: -{
      -  "description": "The token create_anonymous_account returned. This connection has no Morpha key, so every call carries it.",
      -  "type": "string"
      -}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "workspaceId",
      -  "name",
      -  "anonymousToken"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "workspaceId",
      +  "name"
      +]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "description": "The result envelope every Morpha tool returns.",
      +  "properties": {
      +    "data": {
      +      "description": "The payload, shaped by the tool.",
      +      "type": [
      +        "object",
      +        "array",
      +        "string",
      +        "number",
      +        "boolean",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "editorUrl": {
      +      "description": "Opens this project in the editor.",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "error": {
      +      "description": "Why it failed.",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "note": {
      +      "description": "What to do next when not ready.",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "ok": {
      +      "description": "Whether the call succeeded.",
      +      "type": "boolean"
      +    },
      +    "status": {
      +      "description": "For cache-backed readers: whether the answer was ready.",
      +      "enum": [
      +        "ready",
      +        "not-ready"
      +      ],
      +      "type": "string"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "ok"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / anonymousToken
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The token create_anonymous_account returned. This connection has no Morpha key, so every call carries it.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "workspaceId",
      -  "name"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "workspaceId",
      +  "name",
      +  "anonymousToken"
      +]
  4. Added

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations by specifying the precise scope of the mutation: 'Touches only the label — membership, projects and roles are unchanged.' It also discloses the permission model and that editor/viewer roles are refused, which is meaningful behavioral context the annotations alone do not provide.

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?

The description is three sentences with no redundant wording. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, then states the permission prerequisite, ID source, and scope of change. Every sentence contributes useful information.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a simple two-parameter rename operation, the description is complete: it explains the operation, prerequisites, ID source, and exactly what the mutation does not affect. The presence of an output schema covers return-value expectations, so nothing essential is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage for the two parameters is 100%, and the description adds extra meaning by explaining that the name parameter sets the label and that the workspace ID should come from list_workspaces. This reinforces the schema descriptions and clarifies that no other workspace properties are affected.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the specific action ('Rename an existing workspace') and the resource it acts on. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like rename_project or rename_version by clarifying that only the workspace's label changes while 'membership, projects and roles are unchanged'.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides strong context for when to use the tool: it requires owner/admin rolehare, informs that editor/viewer is refused, and tells the agent to source the workspace ID from list_workspaces. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, but the role requirement and ID sourcing gives clear operational guidance.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources