rename_folder

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only states the operation itself. It does not disclose side effects on contained emails, whether the old name becomes available, permission requirements, idempotency, or error behavior. It is not contradictory, just silent.

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 short with no filler, but it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise. It essentially repeats the tool title and provides no structure or additional information.

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 mutating tool with three required parameters, no annotations, and no parameter descriptions, this one-line phrasing leaves key context missing. The presence of an output schema covers return values, but the operation's effect and invocation requirements remain under-explained.

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 parameter meanings. It never clarifies that folder_name is the new name, folder_id identifies the target, or account_id scopes the operation, so an agent could plausibly pass the wrong value.

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?

"Rename a folder." states a clear action and resource, and the verb "rename" distinguishes it from sibling operations like create_folder and delete_folder. It does not add nuance about which folder type or what "rename" entails, but it is not a meaningless restatement.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. The agent must infer suitability entirely from the tool name and sibling list.

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