update_folder_name

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

Annotations already signal that this is a mutating operation with destructiveHint=true. The description adds useful context by stating that only the name changes, that the updated folder is returned in the same shape as `get_folder`, and that `name` is the only editable field. It does not go into irreversibility or permissions, but the annotation plus mutation semantics cover the core behavior.

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 tightly organized with labeled sections: purpose, when to use, alternative, prerequisite, example, and return shape. Every sentence adds actionable information without unnecessary filler.

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 simple two-parameter rename tool, the description covers when to use it, when not to, where to get the ID, a worked example, and the return shape. It is sufficiently complete even without an output schema.

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 only documents `name` as 'New Folder Name' and leaves `id` undocumented. The description compensates by explaining that `id` comes from `get_root_folders` and providing a complete JSON example that clarifies both parameter roles.

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?

States the specific operation 'Rename a folder' and explicitly distinguishes it from `move_folder` and other sibling operations. It also clarifies that `name` is the sole editable field, leaving no ambiguity about the tool's scope.

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?

Provides explicit USE WHEN and USE INSTEAD guidance, routing agents to `move_folder` for repositioning. It also gives a FIRST directive explaining where `id` comes from and that `get_root_folders` should be called first if needed.

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