arvan_rename_server

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

Annotations indicate destructive (write) and idempotent behavior, but the description adds no extra behavioral context. It doesn't specify if renaming affects running servers, permissions needed, or any side effects.

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 concise (one sentence), which is good for brevity but lacks necessary detail. It is front-loaded but insufficient for effective tool invocation.

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 no output schema and minimal description, the tool definition lacks completeness. It fails to explain return values, error conditions, or any contextual information needed to use the tool appropriately.

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%, meaning the schema provides no parameter descriptions. The description fails to explain the purpose of 'server_id', 'name', or the optional 'region' parameter, leaving the agent without critical semantic guidance.

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 action ('Rename') and the resource ('a cloud server'). It distinguishes itself from sibling server operations like create, delete, resize, etc. However, it is minimal and could be more specific.

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 versus alternatives, such as when renaming is appropriate or any prerequisites. The description simply restates the function without context.

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