Coda Update Folder

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the sentence "This is an idempotent operation" merely restates the annotation rather than adding context. The description never addresses what happens when the nullable name is omitted/null (does it clear the name?), nor any permission or failure behavior.

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?

Short, front-loaded, and free of padding, but the first two sentences overlap ("Update a folder's name" / "Renames the specified folder"), so one of them does not fully earn its place.

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?

With an output schema present and parameters fully documented, the return value need not be explained, so the definition is minimally adequate. It still omits the behavioral edge case of a null name for a mutation tool, leaving a real gap for a rename operation.

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 100%, so folder_id and name are already documented in the schema; the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no syntax, constraints, or clarification of the nullable name default beyond what the schema states.

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 and resource ("Update a folder's name", "Renames the specified folder"), which is unambiguous and clearly distinct from rename-capable siblings like coda_update_doc or coda_update_page. It does not, however, explicitly differentiate itself from the other folder tools (get/create/delete_folder).

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 versus alternatives, and no prerequisites such as needing the folder to exist or how to obtain folder_id (coda_list_folders / coda_get_folder). The agent is left to infer usage from the name alone.

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