rename_profile

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the mutating nature is partly covered. Beyond that, the description says nothing about whether the rename persists, whether new_name must be unique, what happens if the profile doesn't exist, or whether the old name stays valid.

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?

A single short sentence with the verb and resource up front and a tight inline example. No filler, nothing redundant.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, and the operation is simple with only two parameters. However, with 0% schema coverage and no usage or behavioral context, the agent still lacks validation rules and failure-mode information for a mutating tool.

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 0% and neither parameter has a description, but the example ("google.com-1" -> "work") effectively maps 'profile' to the existing identifier and 'new_name' to the replacement label. That adds real meaning beyond the bare schema, though it doesn't specify format constraints or allowed characters.

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?

States a specific verb (rename) and resource (a saved login/profile), and the concrete example "google.com-1" -> "work" makes clear what a profile is and what renaming does. It also implicitly distinguishes it from list_profiles/delete_profile by naming the mutation, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with those siblings.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this versus alternatives such as delete_profile or start_login, and no prerequisites (e.g., that the profile must already exist). The only guidance is the illustrative example, which implies but does not state context.

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