entity_duplicate

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

Annotations already disclose readOnly=false, idempotent=false, and destructive=false, so the mutation profile is partly covered. The description adds a genuinely useful behavioral detail — the offset is applied in the parent coordinate system — but says nothing about whether the duplicate is selected, what it returns, or how naming interacts with copies.

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, front-loaded with the action and resource. It earns its place but is arguably too terse given the undocumented parameters.

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?

For a 6-parameter mutating tool with no output schema and zero schema descriptions, the description leaves the agent without enough to call it correctly — it does not explain model_id, unit, path, or naming 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 description coverage is 0% across 6 parameters, so the description must compensate. It only loosely maps to 'translation'/'offset' and the source entity; name, unit, model_id, and path are entirely undocumented in both schema and description.

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 ('Copy') and resource ('a group or component'), plus the spatial behavior (offset in parent coordinate system). It does not explicitly contrast with siblings such as entity_group, entity_make_unique, or entity_create_*, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no alternative named for related operations like entity_make_unique or entity_group. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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