Fork a preset or published community style into a trained voice

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true. The description adds significant behavioral detail: a public-style fork makes one network call to etincel.ai while a preset fork stays local, and the original style is untouched. This goes beyond the annotations by clarifying side-effect scope and non-destructive 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?

The description is about 100 words, organized in three sentences: action, source types with examples, and outcome. It is dense but every sentence conveys essential information. Slightly long for the tool's complexity, but the structure is logical and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

Covers the two source modes, network behavior, non-destructive nature, and the relationship to retraining/hand-tuning. Does not explain error handling or return values, but with no output schema and the tool's moderate complexity, this is acceptable. The description provides enough context for an agent to pick and invoke it 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 covers 100% of parameters, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the dual meaning of styleId, giving the 'handle/slug' format and concrete examples, and noting that presetId is a deprecated alias. This clarifies how to address both source types beyond the schema's generic descriptions.

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?

Description states 'Copy a style into a new trained voice under the given name' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes two source types (preset vs published community style) and clarifies the result is a normal trained voice, differentiating it from sibling creation tools like create_style_from_dials. The title also reinforces the purpose.

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 specifies when each source type is appropriate (preset vs public gallery address) and notes the network call implication for public forks. It references post-fork alternatives (train_style, update_style) but does not explicitly state when to choose fork_style over create_style_from_dials, though the context implies it is the starting point for existing styles.

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