rename_project

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It thoroughly discloses authorization, security behavior (authorize-before-reveal, 403 on unauthorized/guessed id), authentication method (SIWX auth), and server validation rules.

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?

Structured well with purpose first, then auth, then validation. Slightly verbose but every sentence adds value, earning a 4.

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?

Covers what the tool does, authorization, and validation but does not mention return value. Still sufficiently complete for a mutation tool.

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 coverage is 100% and description does not add new meaning beyond what the schema already provides for project_id and name.

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?

Clearly states 'Rename a project' with the verb and resource, and distinguishes from siblings like delete_project or update_version by specifying the action is for fixing auto-generated names.

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?

Provides context for when to use (fixing auto-generated names) but does not explicitly outline when not to use or suggest alternatives among siblings.

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