storage_rename

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

No annotations are present, so the description alone must disclose behavior. It only says 'Real action' but does not explain whether overwrites happen, what happens to existing files, side effects, or error conditions.

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 very short and to the point, with no extraneous words. However, it could be slightly longer to include critical details without becoming verbose.

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 no annotations and a tool with two required parameters, the description lacks completeness. It does not mention what the output schema conveys (e.g., success indication) or what behavioral constraints exist.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should elaborate on parameters. It only mentions 'old' and 'new' implicitly as file/dir paths, but no format, allowed patterns, or examples.

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 tool renames or moves a file or directory, with the specific resource and action. It distinguishes from siblings like storage_delete, storage_list, etc., as no other sibling handles renaming.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or conditions under which rename/move is appropriate.

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