instance_rename

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only says 'Rename' and provides no information about persistence, potential failures, naming constraints, effect on paths or references, or return behavior. This is a significant gap 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, clear sentence with no filler or repetition. It is appropriately concise for a simple two-parameter tool, though it is sparse in 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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description leaves out important context for an agent invoking a rename operation, such as whether the target must be unique, whether the path changes, or how references are affected. This makes the tool incomplete for safe and informed use.

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 covers both parameters with 100% coverage: target is 'Full path or UUID' and newName is 'The new name'. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb ('Rename') and resource ('Instance in the DataModel'). It clearly identifies what the tool does and is naturally differentiated from siblings like instance_move or instance_clone, though it does not explicitly name an alternative.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as instance_move or instance_reparent. The name implies the use case, but there are no explicit conditions, exclusions, or context to help an agent choose correctly.

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