rename_address

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'rename any address' without mentioning side effects (e.g., is the change permanent? Does it affect cross-references? Is it reversible?). This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 a single sentence with no extraneous words. Every part contributes to the purpose. It is front-loaded and highly concise.

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?

Given the lack of annotations, low schema coverage, and the complexity of renaming addresses in a disassembly tool, the description is incomplete. It does not explain behavior for invalid addresses, uniqueness of names, return value (despite an output schema existing), or whether the operation is idempotent. The agent lacks context for safe invocation.

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% coverage (no descriptions for parameters), so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by specifying 'Pass hex address and new name,' clarifying that address should be in hex format. However, it does not explain constraints for new_name or other details, so the addition is minimal.

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 'Rename any address (global variable, label, etc)' with a specific verb and resource, and implies distinction from sibling tools like rename_function (which renames functions) and rename_local_variable (local scope). However, it does not explicitly contrast with these siblings.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only implies that addresses (global variables, labels) are the target, without stating when not to use it or naming alternative tools for similar tasks.

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