create_safe_copy

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

With no annotations, the description must explain side effects, but it only states 'write'. It does not mention that this is a state-changing (potentially destructive) operation, whether it overwrites files, or any security or permissions considerations. The user is left without awareness of implications.

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 with no unnecessary words. It is efficient and directly states the primary action, earning a perfect score for conciseness.

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 tool lacks essential context: what constitutes 'sanitized content', how the policy parameter affects behavior, and what the return value or success criteria are. Even though an output schema exists (per context), it is not described, and the description alone is insufficient for a user to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 does not elaborate on any of the three parameters (policy, content, filename). Since the schema provides no descriptions, the description should clarify their roles, especially the 'policy' parameter with a default value. It fails to add any meaning beyond the raw names.

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?

Clearly states the action (write) and the resource (sanitized content to a configured directory), and implies a specific function distinct from sibling tools like analyze or redact. However, it lacks detail on what 'sanitized' entails and the exact scope of 'only'.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool over the siblings. It does not mention prerequisites, conditions, or scenarios that would call for creating a safe copy. The word 'only' hints at a restriction but does not explain when this should be chosen.

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