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

Beyond annotations (readOnly=false, idempotent=false, destructive=false), it discloses that the source is untouched, copies are fully independent, a template id is accepted only here, and full access is required with a reference link. This is meaningful context annotations don't provide.

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?

Front-loads the core copy behavior and independence guarantee before the template/permission notes. Dense but every sentence carries distinct information; slightly crowded by the access reference link.

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 non-destructive write with no output schema, the description covers result semantics (new independent bank, source preserved), the project fallback, and the access requirement—everything needed to invoke correctly.

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%, so baseline is 3; the description adds that projectId falls back to the key's project and that questionBankId may be a template id, reinforcing schema meaning without contradiction. Adds modest value over 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?

States a specific verb (copies) and resource (question bank + items) with the key property that the copy is independent and the source untouched. Clearly distinguishable from siblings like question_bank_rename, publish, or discard_changes.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent this is the accepted route for a public template id and the way to edit a template (duplicate then edit the copy). This reserves the tool for a named scenario and directs away from trying other mutations.

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