Copiar archivo o carpeta

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

The annotations already indicate this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world operation. The description adds some behavioral context by mentioning verification of limits, links, and integrity, but it does not explain overwrite behavior, permission requirements, or how confirmar/aprobacion_id affect execution.

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 definition is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately sized, though the brevity contributes to the gaps in other dimensions.

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 four-parameter mutation tool with 0% schema description coverage, no output schema, and an approval parameter, the description is too sparse. It omits confirmation/approval semantics, overwrite behavior, and return-value expectations, leaving the agent with insufficient operational context.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, but it does not name or explain any of the four parameters. It only implies a source and destination concept, leaving confirmar and aprobacion_id entirely unaddressed.

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 states a specific verb (copia) and resource (archivo o carpeta completa), plus the target (a una ruta nueva). This clearly distinguishes it from mover_elemento, though it does not name the sibling or elaborate on scope limits.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The description merely states what the tool does, not when an agent should choose it.

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