cp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Copy file or directory,' which implies a read-and-write operation, but doesn't specify permissions needed, whether it overwrites existing files, handles errors, or provides feedback. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 with a single sentence ('Copy file or directory.'), which is front-loaded and wastes no words. It efficiently communicates the core action, making it easy to scan and understand quickly.

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 (a mutation operation with one undocumented parameter), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to address key aspects like parameter format, behavioral details, or output expectations, making it inadequate for safe and effective use.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the single parameter 'request' is undocumented. The description doesn't add any meaning beyond the schema—it doesn't explain what 'request' should contain (e.g., source and destination paths), leaving parameter usage ambiguous and incomplete.

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 verb ('Copy') and resource ('file or directory'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'mv' (move) or 'write' (create/write), which could also involve file operations, so it doesn't reach the highest score.

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 'mv' for moving files or 'write' for creating files. It lacks context about prerequisites, such as whether source and destination paths must be specified in the request parameter, leaving usage unclear.

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