update_folder

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

Annotations already establish readOnly=false, destructive=false, and idempotent=true. The description adds a useful auth requirement ('Needs the edit scope') and clarifies the specific mutation being performed. There is no contradiction with the annotations.

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?

Two short sentences, both informative: one states the operation, the other states the required scope. There is no filler or redundant repetition of schema information.

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?

For a low-complexity mutation with fully described parameters, informative annotations, and no output schema, the description is sufficient for selection and invocation. It does not describe return values or error behavior, but those are not essential here.

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 covers 100% of parameters with clear descriptions ('Folder id.', 'New name.'). The description does not add parameter-specific detail beyond the rename semantics, so it meets the baseline but provides no additional value.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Rename a folder') and clearly distinguishes this from sibling folder operations like create_folder, delete_folder, get_folder, and list_folders. The operation is unambiguous even without opening the schema.

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 description provides clear context by naming the operation ('Rename') and an explicit prerequisite ('Needs the edit scope'). It does not explicitly list alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but for a simple rename operation the usage context is clear.

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