ecp_files_copy_multiple

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral context. It hints at a copy operation but doesn't confirm non-destructiveness, error handling, or whether the source can be a folder. The term 'copy' implies non-destructive, but this is not explicit, and no additional context is provided.

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 a single, concise sentence that is easy to read and front-loads the action. It is not overly verbose, but its brevity contributes to the lack of detail.

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 tool's complexity (copying multiple files/folders) and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain crucial aspects like whether copying a folder is recursive, how conflicts are handled, or what the return value is. More detail is needed for an agent to use 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain the parameters. It mentions 'file_paths' and 'destination' in the name context but doesn't clarify formats (e.g., absolute paths, handling of multiple items, whether destination can be a directory). The description is too brief to compensate for the missing schema details.

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 the action ('Copy multiple files/folders') and the target ('to a destination') clearly. However, it doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like ecp_files_copy, ecp_files_move_multiple, or ecp_files_move, which could be ambiguous to an agent.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ecp_files_copy for single items or ecp_files_move_multiple for moving. It doesn't mention that 'copy' is non-destructive, nor does it specify any constraints on source/destination paths.

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