documents_copy

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states the basic action. It does not reveal whether the copy is a deep copy, whether permissions or sharing settings are preserved, if the operation is reversible, or what the return value is. This lack of detail 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 appropriately concise: a single sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It contains no filler or redundant information, earning full marks for brevity and clarity.

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 has three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not mention that the optional parameters allow the copy to be placed in a different collection or under a parent document, nor does it hint at the response format. A copy operation typically has side effects (creating a new document) that should be disclosed for the agent to use it safely.

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 covers all parameters (100% coverage) with descriptions for id, collectionId, and parentDocumentId. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, but since the baseline is 3 for high schema coverage, this score is appropriate. The tool description does not clarify relationships between parameters or default behaviors.

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 uses the specific verb 'copy' with the resource 'document', clearly indicating the operation. It distinguishes itself from siblings like documents_create, documents_move, and documents_restore, as no other tool explicitly mentions 'copy'. The one-sentence description directly states the tool's purpose without ambiguity.

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 such as documents_create for creating a new document or documents_move for relocating one. There are no explicit usage conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without contextual cues for selection.

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