update_template_folder

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=false. The description adds that it respects read-only and dry-run modes, has max 10 concurrent requests, and requires API key authentication. It also states templates are unaffected, which is useful. No contradictions.

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 concise: one sentence for purpose, then a brief paragraph with usage and constraints, followed by parameter details and return format. It is front-loaded 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (3 parameters, no nesting, output schema exists), the description is complete: it covers purpose, parameters, output, side effects (templates unaffected), authentication, rate limits, and how to get required IDs. No gaps.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description provides detailed explanations for all three parameters (folder_id, name, account) in the Args section: how to get folder_id, what name is for, and how account works. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema types.

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 'Rename an existing template folder' which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like list_template_folders and create_template_folder by specifying the rename action and noting that assigned templates are unaffected.

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 description says to use this tool for updating a folder's display name and to use list_template_folders to discover folder IDs. It implies when to use it, but doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or compare with alternatives like create_template_folder. However, the context is clear enough.

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