Rename Folder

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

Annotations indicate non-readonly and non-destructive, which aligns with a rename operation. The description adds that protected system folders cannot be renamed, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., impact on assigned emails) or failure scenarios. With minimal annotations, more behavioral context would be beneficial.

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?

Two short, clear sentences that immediately convey the purpose and key constraint. No unnecessary words, and every sentence adds value.

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?

With two string parameters and an existing output schema, the description minimally covers what the tool does. It lacks context on error handling, duplicate names, or behavior when folder doesn't exist. Given the tool's complexity and sibling set, more detail would improve completeness.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters ('Current folder path' and 'New folder path'). The description does not add further meaning beyond the schema, such as path format, allowed characters, or constraints, so it stays at baseline 3.

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 clearly states the verb 'Rename' and the resource 'custom folder or label', and distinguishes from sibling tools like create_folder and delete_folder by specifying the action and constraint on protected system folders.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like move_to_folder. The description only mentions that protected system folders cannot be renamed, but does not provide when-not-to-use or alternative tool references.

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