jio_rename_album

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it does not. Renaming is a mutating operation, yet the description omits side effects, permissions, reversibility, or return behavior. The parentId constraint is a small behavioral nuance but insufficient for full transparency.

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 two short sentences: the first states the core action and identifier, the second adds a parameter nuance. Every word earns its place, and the key information is front-loaded.

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?

For a tool with 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too skeletal. It fails to mention return type, required permissions, or the effect of renaming on related data. The list of sibling tools adds context but the description itself does not provide enough for confident 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?

Schema coverage is low (33%: only 'id' has a description). The description adds meaning to 'parentId' by clarifying it is the current parent folder key, which helps. However, 'name' is not explicitly described, though its purpose is implied by the 'Rename' action. This partial compensation merits a middle score.

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 ('Rename') and the resource ('folder album') with an explicit identifier ('by objectKey/id'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like jio_move_to_album or jio_create_album, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The only additional sentence ('parentId should be the current parent folder key when known') is a parameter hint, not usage context. No conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned.

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