duplicate_table_row

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It mentions 'deep-copy' and insertion behavior, but does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., field updates, numbering changes) or undo capability. Adds some transparency but insufficient 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 extremely concise: two sentences, first sentence states purpose, second details parameters and return. No redundant information, front-loaded and efficient.

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?

The tool is simple with two parameters and a documented return type. The description covers the core functionality and output. Missing error conditions (e.g., out-of-bounds indices) but overall complete for its complexity.

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%, so the description must explain parameters. It clearly defines both table_idx and row_index as 0-based indices, adding meaning beyond the schema. Could mention bounds but adequate for clarity.

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 action: deep-copy a table row and insert it immediately after. It specifies the resource (table row) and the operation (duplicate and insert), distinguishing it from sibling tools like add_table_row or delete_table_row.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as add_table_row or delete_table_row. Missing prerequisites (e.g., table must exist, row index valid) and conditions under which duplication is appropriate.

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