rename_object

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

The description only says 'Rename an object' without disclosing behavioral details like whether it updates references, error handling for name conflicts, or if it works on all object types. With no annotations, the description should provide more context.

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 very concise, with a clear structure showing args and returns. However, it lacks explanatory depth that would make it truly valuable.

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 simplicity of the tool and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not mention whether the object must exist, what happens on duplicate names, or any side effects. The output schema exists but is not referenced.

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 description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema: it repeats parameter names and states they are the current and new names. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate but does not provide additional constraints or format details.

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 an object', providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings as there is no other rename tool among the many listed.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as duplicate_object or set_object_property. No conditions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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