copy-asset

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses automatic parent folder creation, no effect on references, and path restrictions. It also signals it is a write operation ('Plane B (file channel, write)'). Could be improved by mentioning error handling for overwrite=false.

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 two sentences plus a parenthetical and requirement note. It is front-loaded with key context ('Plane B (file channel, write)') and every sentence adds essential information without redundancy.

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 no output schema and 3 parameters, the description covers core behavior well. It lacks details on whether folders can be copied (only files are implied). Also does not specify return value. However, it is fairly complete for a file copy operation.

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 coverage is 100%, baseline 3. The description adds value by explaining that missing destination parent folders are created automatically (relevant to toPath). This goes beyond the schema's description. No additional info for fromPath or overwrite, but sufficient.

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 tool copies a file under Foundry's Data/ root. It specifies the file channel (Plane B write), mentions automatic parent folder creation, and distinguishes from world-DB operations. The verb 'Copy' and resource 'file under Data/ root' are specific and 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 implicitly tells when to use (to copy files within Data/ root) and includes important constraints (refuses live world-DB paths, requires MOLTEN_WEBDAV_PASSWORD). It does not explicitly name alternatives like move-asset, but the context of copying vs moving is clear.

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