copy_world

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose one genuine behavioral trait beyond the schema: the copy's session.lock is dropped, which signals the duplicate is not lock-conflicted. However, it says nothing about collision handling if newName already exists, whether the source world is touched, required preconditions (instance stopped vs running), or failure modes.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the key behavior in a tight parenthetical. Nothing is padded and nothing is buried.

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 simple three-parameter copy tool with no output schema, the core is covered and the session.lock detail is a nice touch. Still missing are the collision/overwrite rule and whether the source instance must be idle, which an agent needs before invoking a write operation with no annotations.

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 all three parameters rely on their names, which happen to be largely self-describing. The description maps them loosely (world folder, inside an instance, new name), adding modest clarity but no format, constraint, or validation detail.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (copy a world folder) plus the scope (inside an instance, under a new name). The parenthetical about dropping session.lock further pins down what the operation actually produces. It stops short of naming a sibling like backup_world to disambiguate copy-vs-backup, so it is clear but not sibling-differentiated.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no mention of the obvious alternative, backup_world, or of when a copy is preferable to a backup. Usage must be inferred purely from the one-line purpose statement.

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