rename_node

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states the action. It does not mention that this is a mutating operation, potential irreversibility, permission requirements, or what happens if the node doesn't exist. The description adds no behavioral information beyond the tool's name.

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, focused sentence that conveys the tool's purpose with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for a simple rename operation and front-loads the key action.

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?

Despite the simple two-parameter schema, this is a mutating tool with no annotations or output schema. The description fails to provide behavioral context, usage guidance, or edge-case handling, leaving the agent with insufficient information to fully understand the operation's implications.

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 input schema provides full descriptions for both parameters (nodeId and name) with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to elaborate. Since the description contains no additional parameter semantics, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('node (layer)'), making it unambiguous. It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like move_node, delete_node, and resize_node due to its specific verb and object.

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 versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of exclusions or side conditions. The one-line description simply states the action without any context for decision-making.

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