check_rename

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

Description confirms read-only behavior (aligns with readOnlyHint) and adds specifics: checks own file and all importing files, returns conflict details. Exceeds annotation-only info.

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 focused sentences: purpose, usage instruction, behavior and return format. No wasted words.

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?

Despite no output schema, description explains return JSON structure. Annotations cover safety, schema covers params. All needed context is present.

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% with parameter descriptions. Description does not add new semantic detail beyond those, though it provides context by mentioning the scope of checks.

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 identifies as pre-rename collision detection, checks symbol's own file and importing files for target name conflicts. Distinct from sibling apply_rename.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use before apply_rename to verify safety', providing clear usage context. No explicit when-not or alternatives needed for a safety check.

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