update_folder_name_by_id_api_v1_folders

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

The description implies a write operation ('Update') but discloses no behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, idempotency, error handling, or side effects. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but provides minimal transparency.

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 short (four words), but it is under-specified rather than concise. It fails to add value beyond the tool name, so the sentence does not 'earn its place.'

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 tool with 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely inadequate. It omits critical information about parameter roles, return values, and error conditions, leaving an agent with insufficient context for reliable invocation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no explanation for the four parameters (id, data, meta, name). While 'name' is hinted, 'data' and 'meta' remain completely opaque, leaving an agent without necessary context to correctly populate the input.

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 'Update Folder Name By Id' clearly states the action and resource, but it merely rephrases the tool name without adding new context. It does not distinguish this tool from siblings like 'update_folder_parent_id_by_id' or 'update_folder_is_expanded_by_id', so it meets only the 'vague purpose' threshold.

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 is provided on when to use this tool vs. alternative folder update tools. An agent would have to infer usage solely from the tool name, which is insufficient for making an informed selection.

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