duplicate_table_row

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the operation is a 'deep-copy' and inserts the copy 'immediately after' the original, indicating a write operation that modifies document structure. However, it does not mention potential side effects like track changes or document protection, leaving some gaps.

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 extremely concise: a one-line summary followed by clearly labeled Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value, with no wasted words. The structure is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 the moderate complexity of duplicating a table row and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the core workflow, parameters, and return value. It is mostly complete, though it could mention constraints like valid indices or whether all cell properties are preserved.

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 provides no descriptions (0% coverage), but the description adds clear semantics for both parameters: '0-based table index' and '0-based index of the row to duplicate'. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of detail.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('Deep-copy') and resource ('table row'), along with the action of inserting the copy immediately after the original. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'copy_table' and 'delete_table_row'.

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 implies usage (when you need to duplicate a row) but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or how it compares to alternatives. No when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions are provided.

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