Rename Node

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the key trait that edges are preserved across the move, which is exactly the non-obvious behavior an agent needs. But it omits other behavioral facts: what happens if new_id already exists, whether old_id must exist, permission requirements, and the vault parameter's role.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the core action first and the clarifying rationale in a parenthetical. Efficient and free of padding, though the example clause is somewhat dense.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. The description covers the essential purpose and edge-preservation semantics but leaves parameter meaning (especially vault) and error/edge cases unaddressed for a mutation tool with no annotations to lean on.

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%, so the description must compensate for all three parameters. 'Move a node to a new id' loosely maps to old_id/new_id, but neither parameter is named or explained, and the vault parameter is entirely undocumented in both schema and description.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Move a node to a new id') and adds a distinguishing behavioral trait ('carrying every edge with it') that separates it from upsert_node or delete_node. It implicitly contrasts with index_repo's delete-then-create behavior. It does not explicitly name a sibling, so it falls just short of a 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?

The parenthetical gives one clear use case ('after a file move index_repo would otherwise treat as delete-then-create') which implies when the tool is needed. However, it offers no explicit when-not guidance and never names the sibling tools (upsert_node, delete_node) an agent would otherwise reach for, leaving the choice to inference.

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