rename_file_v2

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

No annotations provided, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits. It does not mention whether the operation is destructive, if it requires specific permissions, or what happens to the file's metadata. The description adds no value beyond the name.

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?

Very concise single sentence, but includes an irrelevant API endpoint ('via /api/v2/files') that adds no value for an AI agent. Could be improved by removing that detail.

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 rename tool with 2 parameters, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain return values, error conditions, or constraints like name uniqueness. Agents lack information to handle the tool properly.

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 clear parameter descriptions. The description adds minimal extra meaning (just 'user-scoped' and API path). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does most of the work.

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 states the action (rename) and resource (file), but the addition of the API endpoint is extraneous. It distinguishes from sibling file operations but could be more specific about scope (e.g., 'owned by the current user').

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor any prerequisites or conditions. Agents receive no help deciding between rename_file_v2 and other file operations.

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