duplicate_asset

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: source preservation, destination non-existence requirement, and absence of redirector. This is strong but could mention error handling or authorization needs.

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?

Three concise sentences, each adding distinct value: purpose, key constraints, and behavioral nuance. No redundant or unnecessary 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 two required parameters and no output schema, the description covers essential behavioral aspects. It could mention return value or async nature, but overall sufficient for usage.

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?

Parameter descriptions in the input schema already provide meaning (source vs. destination paths). The description adds overall context but no per-parameter details beyond the schema, resulting in baseline score.

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 tool copies an asset, preserves the source, requires a non-existent destination, and creates no redirector. This distinguishes it from siblings like move_asset, rename_asset, and delete_asset.

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 implies when to use (when a copy is needed, destination new) but does not explicitly list when not to use or mention alternative tools. The differentiation from move_asset (source preserved) and rename_asset (no redirector) is clear.

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