kaiten_copy_automation

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden, but it only states the action. It does not disclose whether the source automation is left unchanged, what permissions are required, whether the copy overwrites an existing automation, or what the operation returns. This is a material gap for a mutation-like 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant phrasing. Every word contributes to identifying the action and its object.

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 core operation and all required parameters are clear, making the tool invocable with the provided schema. However, because there is no output schema and no annotation layer, the description is missing behavioral context such as return value, success/failure behavior, and permission requirements, so it is only minimally 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so all three parameters are already described in the input schema. The description adds only the directional nuance 'another space,' which reinforces that target_space_id should differ from space_id, but it does not meaningfully enrich parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 ('copy') with a clear resource ('automation') and destination ('another space'), making the operation unambiguous. It also differentiates from sibling automation tools such as kaiten_create_automation, kaiten_update_automation, and kaiten_delete_automation by naming the copy action.

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 intended use case ('copy an automation to another space') is implied by the operation itself, but the description gives no explicit guidance about when to choose this tool over kaiten_create_automation or when copying is not appropriate. No alternatives, exclusions, or prerequisites are mentioned.

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