Baidu Copy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that this is a write/mutation operation and explains the src_paths-to-destination convention, which is real behavioral context. However, it says nothing about overwrite/conflict behavior (the ondup enum's effect), reversibility, or required authentication.

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 compact sentence that front-loads the action and qualifies it with the operation type and the key path convention. Nothing is wasted or 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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, but for a 6-parameter write tool with zero annotations the definition is thin: it omits conflict handling (ondup), host/port/scheme/profile implications, and any note on error or permission conditions.

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 83%, above the 80% threshold, so the baseline is 3. The description's only parameter-relevant statement (last src_paths item is the target directory) is already present verbatim in the schema's src_paths description, so it adds no meaning beyond the schema.

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 (复制网盘文件 / copy netdisk files) and explicitly flags the operation class as 写操作. An agent can distinguish it from the sibling baidu_move without opening either schema, though no sibling is named.

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?

Usage is implied by the parenthetical hint that the last src_paths entry is the destination directory, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no comparison to baidu_move or baidu_upload, and no stated prerequisites (auth/session).

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