post_fs_rename

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits. It only lists error codes, which is insufficient for understanding side effects or requirements.

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 extremely concise but fails to structure information usefully. It is just a list of error codes with no purpose statement or usage context, making it under-specified rather than efficient.

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 lack of output schema, annotations, and a meaningful input schema, the description is completely inadequate. A rename tool requires much more context (e.g., source/destination paths, conflict behavior) than a list of error codes.

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 input schema has no properties, and schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no meaningful parameter information beyond what the schema already indicates (i.e., no parameters), but the lack of parameters is suspicious for a rename operation.

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 does not state what the tool does; it only lists error codes. The name 'post_fs_rename' suggests renaming filesystem items, but the description provides no verb or resource to confirm this.

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 like 'post_fs_mv' or 'post_fs_cp'. The description lacks any situational context.

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