Runn: update workstream

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states the action and HTTP method. It does not disclose permissions, reversibility, error behavior, or other side effects, which 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 front-loaded sentence with the endpoint in parentheses. It is concise and every word earns its place.

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?

The operation is simple with only two required parameters, but the description lacks details on return values, error handling, or prerequisites. It is sufficient for basic tool selection but not comprehensive.

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 0%, but the verb 'rename' implies that 'name' is the new name and 'workstreamId' is the target. This adds semantic meaning beyond the schema's type definitions, though it is not explicit.

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 and resource: 'Rename a workstream' with the endpoint. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like runn_create_workstream and runn_delete_workstream.

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 implies use when renaming a workstream. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough given the tool's name and the action described.

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