Rename a file or directory inside a writable Storage Access Framework root on an Android device. Provide root ID, path, and new name to update the entry.
Rename a file or directory inside a writable authorized SAF root.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes | ||
| rootId | Yes | ||
| newName | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.6.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds the constraint 'writable authorized' which clarifies the operational context, but it does not disclose side effects, error conditions, or return behavior. Since annotations already indicate it is destructive and not read-only, the description offers minimal additional insight.
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 unnecessary words or complexity.
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 description explains the operation at a high level but lacks parameter details, output/error expectations, and any mention of side effects. Given the simplicity of the operation and the absence of an output schema, it is still incomplete.
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 provides no explanation of the parameters (rootId, path, newName). With zero schema description coverage, this leaves the agent without any guidance on what each parameter should contain.
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 (file or directory within a writable authorized SAF root). It distinguishes from sibling file operations like move, copy, and delete.
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 context that the operation requires a writable authorized root, but it does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention prerequisites like permissions beyond the root being writable.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.