rename_prompt_book

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

There are no annotations, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Rename' implies a mutation, but the description does not state whether the operation is reversible, whether it requires an existing configuration, or whether it has any side effects on associated prompts. This leaves significant behavioral ambiguity.

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 a single short sentence with no filler or redundant information. It conveys the action efficiently and front-loads the core purpose.

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 operation with full schema coverage, the description is adequate but not rich. It lacks any note about return values, persistence, uniqueness constraints, or the effect on related resources. Since no annotations exist, a bit more context would help make the tool fully self-explanatory.

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 already documents both parameters with clear descriptions ('ID of the prompt book to rename' and 'New name for the prompt book'), covering 100% of parameters. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Rename') and a clear resource ('a prompt book configuration'), making the action unambiguous. It also distinguishes this tool from sibling config tools like create, remove, activate, and list, so an agent can identify it correctly without opening the schema.

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?

The intended use is implied by the verb and resource: use this tool when the name of an existing prompt book configuration must be changed. However, there is no explicit guidance about when not to use it or how it compares to create_prompt_book_config or remove_prompt_book_config, leaving some inference to the agent.

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