Rename a single NexBrowser window by its window ID and new title without closing it or changing other window settings.
Rename one NexBrowser window. Pass only windowId and the new name; no other window settings change. The name is window metadata, so running windows can be renamed without closing them first.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | New window title | |
| windowId | Yes | One window ID from nex_browser_list |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2026.10.24Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Beyond the idempotentHint annotation, the description discloses that no other window settings change and that renaming works on running windows without closing them. It does not cover permission requirements or failure behavior, but it adds meaningful mutation-scope context.
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?
Three short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and invocation constraint. Each sentence adds useful information: scope, parameter restriction, and the live-window behavior.
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 simple two-parameter metadata mutation with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It omits error cases such as an invalid windowId, but covers the key behavioral facts an agent needs to call it correctly.
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 100%, so the parameter meanings are already fully documented. The description reinforces that only windowId and name are accepted, but adds no format or syntax details beyond the schema.
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 one NexBrowser window.' It also scopes the operation to window metadata, which distinguishes it from siblings like nex_browser_resize or nex_browser_move_to_group without requiring schema inspection.
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?
It gives a clear usage condition: running windows can be renamed without closing them first, and only windowId and name should be passed. It does not explicitly name exclusions or alternatives, but no direct rename sibling exists.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.