blender_object_rename

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

Description adds no behavioral context beyond annotations (idempotentHint, destructiveHint, readOnlyHint). It does not disclose renaming behavior (e.g., uniqueness constraints, side effects on relations). Score 2.

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?

Description is short but includes verbose docstring boilerplate ('Args:', 'Returns:'). Front-loading is decent. Score 3.

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 good annotations and schema, description omits details like naming rules, case sensitivity, or what happens on duplicate names. Output schema existence is not leveraged. Score 2.

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?

Description merely restates parameter names ('Current name and new name') already defined in schema with descriptions. No additional semantic or usage detail. Score 2.

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?

Description clearly states 'Rename an object' — a specific verb and resource. Among siblings, there is no other rename tool, so differentiation is inherent. Score 5.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., object_duplicate, object_transform). No context about prerequisites or typical scenarios. Score 2.

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