Duplicate Scene Item

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

The description adds 'preserving its transform and crop,' which is a key behavioral guarantee beyond what the annotations (all false) reveal. However, it does not disclose other side effects, error conditions, or side effects like whether linked settings are copied. Since annotations provide no safety context (all false), the description carries the burden but covers only part of the behavior—adequate but not rich.

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 a single, tightly constructed sentence that conveys the core action and a critical qualifier. There is no fluff, redundant phrasing, or unnecessary detail—every word earns its place.

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?

This is a simple tool with no output schema, but the description—combined with well-documented parameters—sufficiently covers the operation's essence. The only minor gap is not mentioning return behavior, but given the low complexity and absence of an output schema, the description feels complete enough for an agent to understand what will happen.

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 100%, meaning all six parameters are already described in the input schema (e.g., 'sceneItemId' as 'Numeric ID of the scene item'). The description does not add extra parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema handles parameter documentation, and the description adds no additional parameter semantics.

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 a specific verb+resource pair ('Duplicate a scene item') and adds the meaningful qualifier 'while preserving its transform and crop,' which clarifies the operation's key behavior. This differentiates it from sibling tools like creating, removing, or transforming scene items, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 by describing the duplication action, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., 'create-scene-item' or 'set-scene-item-transform'). No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided, so guidance is only implicit.

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