Rename Photos in Folder

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds that it renames files in place and returns a structured report, but does not clarify if original files are preserved (e.g., backup) or detail the renaming behavior beyond numbering.

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?

Two concise sentences that directly state the tool's action, scope, and output. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 2 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains the renaming process and return value (structured report). It lacks details on supported file types (implied .jpg) and error scenarios, but is generally sufficient.

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 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds value by explaining the sequential format example and clarifying the two modes ('sequential' strict numbering, 'gap_fill' preserving existing numbers). This goes beyond the schema's enum description.

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 title and description clearly specify renaming and numbering photos in a directory with an example format (seniorname_01.jpg). It distinguishes from siblings like 'graduation_standardize_images' which likely handles image standardization, not renaming.

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 states it operates on the local filesystem with no browser required, implying when to use it (local batch renaming). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives.

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