Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
patchwork-os

patchwork-os

by Oolab-labs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

prepareRename

Read-only

Validates rename feasibility for a symbol at a file location, returning false with reason if rename is blocked. Run before attempting to rename.

Instructions

Check if symbol can be renamed. Returns canRename:false with reason if not. Use before renameSymbol.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "filePath": "<filePath>",
      "line": "<line>",
      "column": "<column>"
    },
    "name": "prepareRename"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
lineYes1-based line number
columnYes1-based column number
filePathYesWorkspace or absolute path

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Discloses that it returns a boolean/reason, consistent with readOnlyHint annotation. Adds context about pre-check behavior without contradicting annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, no redundancy, perfectly concise while conveying purpose and usage.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple check tool with full schema coverage and annotations, the description is complete and provides necessary usage context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so description adds no extra parameter info. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it checks if a symbol can be renamed and returns canRename:false with reason if not, differentiating it from renameSymbol.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says 'Use before renameSymbol', providing clear when-to-use guidance. It does not explain when not to use, but context is sufficient.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools