duplicate_sheet

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

The description mentions key behavioral traits (copying with new UUIDs) but does not disclose important details such as impact on existing connections, hierarchy metadata updates, or potential side effects. With annotations providing no safety hints, the description carries the full burden and is only partially adequate.

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 concise with a one-line summary and an args list. It could be slightly more front-loaded by integrating the summary into a single coherent paragraph, but it is efficient and avoids unnecessary detail.

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 complexity of the tool (5 parameters, output schema present, minimal annotations), the description covers the main purpose and all parameters. However, it lacks context on what constitutes a 'hierarchical sheet' and how duplication interacts with the parent schematic. Still, it is largely complete.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must provide parameter meaning. It does so for all 5 parameters, including the auto-generation behavior for new_file_name. The explanations are clear, though they could be more precise (e.g., what happens if schematic_path is omitted).

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 'Duplicate a hierarchical sheet, copying the child file with new UUIDs.' This is a specific verb-resource pair that distinguishes it from sibling tools like flatten_hierarchy or add_hierarchical_sheet.

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 usage when duplicating a sheet in a hierarchical design, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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