node_duplicate

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It only states the result ('success message or error description') without details on recursive duplication, side effects, or permission requirements. This is minimal.

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 with a clear purpose statement and separate sections for Args and Returns. It is well-structured and front-loaded, though it could be slightly more efficient by reducing redundancy in the Args section.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple duplication tool, but it lacks details on whether children are duplicated, what the output schema contains (though output schema exists), and potential failure modes. It leaves some questions unanswered.

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 description adds some meaning beyond the schema by explaining the default behavior for new_name (original name + number) and providing an example for node_path. However, other parameters like project_path and scene_path are not elaborated beyond their titles.

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 'Duplicate a node in a scene' with a specific verb and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like node_add, node_delete, and node_rename, which have different actions.

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 when to use it (to copy a node) but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. Siblings like node_add exist for creating new nodes, but no comparison is made.

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