Rename Jedox Element

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

Annotations indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) but the description adds no extra behavioral context (e.g., effect on references, permissions, or reversibility). With annotations present, the description adds little value beyond naming the operation.

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: a one-line summary plus an args list and return structure. It is front-loaded and efficient, though the args list could be more compact.

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?

The description covers parameters and return format ({ id, name, typeLabel }) but lacks details on error handling, existence checks, or uniqueness constraints. Given the tool's simplicity, it is minimally adequate but has 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?

Schema description coverage is only 25% (only new_name described), but the description compensates by explaining database_id, dimension_id, and element_id as 'Numeric ID' and clarifies element_id's role, adding meaning beyond the schema's type-only definitions.

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 title 'Rename Jedox Element' and description 'Rename an existing element' clearly specify the verb (rename) and resource (element), and the tool is distinct from create/delete siblings.

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 rename over alternatives like delete+create, nor are there prerequisites (e.g., element must exist) or context for choosing this tool.

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