ftp_copy

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the direct duplication behavior and the SFTP restriction, which are key traits. However, it does not mention whether the destination file is overwritten or what happens to permissions, but the core behavioral insight is present.

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 two sentences, front-loading the verb and resource. Every sentence adds value, with no wasted words.

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 simplicity, lack of output schema, and the presence of sibling tools, the description adequately covers purpose and a critical limitation. It is complete enough for an agent to understand the tool's basic 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning about the parameters beyond what is in the schema, but no compensation is needed.

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 it duplicates a file directly on the remote server, emphasizing it avoids download/upload, and includes a critical note about SFTP-only support. This distinguishes it well from siblings like ftp_upload, ftp_download, and ftp_rename.

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 a critical limitation (SFTP only) but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ftp_rename or ftp_upload+download. The context is clear but does not fully exclude inappropriate uses.

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