Rename a tag, category or tool

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so description adds value by disclosing the slug regeneration side effect and the impact on existing references. This is useful behavioral context beyond the annotation defaults.

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?

The description is two sentences: the first states the purpose concisely, the second adds the critical behavioral note. Every sentence earns its place with zero filler.

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?

Given only 3 parameters, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description covers the key behavioral point (slug regeneration). It does not describe the return value or error conditions, but output schema is absent and importance is lower for an update tool. A 4 is appropriate.

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 schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds minimal parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, but the clarification of 'kind' enum values and the UUID pattern in the schema is comprehensive. Baseline 3 is elevated to 4 because the schema itself is exceptionally clear.

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 clearly states the verb ('renames') and the three specific resources ('tag, category or tool'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'create_organizer' and 'delete_organizer' by specifying this tool performs a rename update, not creation or deletion.

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 explicitly notes a consequence of renaming—slug regeneration causing old slugs to stop matching—which guides when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not explicitly list when not to use it or name an alternative, but the context is clear.

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