Rename Tag

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

The description adds important behavioral context beyond annotations: it explains hierarchical rebasing, dry-run mode, and the requirement to strip leading '#'. The annotations indicate destructive behavior, and the description confirms and elaborates without contradiction.

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 concise (three sentences), front-loaded with the main purpose, and each sentence adds necessary detail. No fluff or repetition.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and annotations, the description adequately covers all behavioral aspects: scope, hierarchical behavior, dryRun, and parameter formatting. It is complete for the tool's complexity.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description provides additional meaning by explaining the leading '#' removal and the effect of hierarchical=true, which adds value beyond the schema.

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 a tag everywhere in the vault, including inline #tags and frontmatter fields. It provides specific scope and distinguishes itself from sibling tools (no other rename tool exists).

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 implicitly makes the usage clear by stating the tool's purpose. While it does not explicitly mention when to use alternatives, the naming and context make it obvious; however, no explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives are provided.

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