copy_modifiers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether existing modifiers on the target are replaced or appended, whether the source remains unchanged, or what happens if the source has no modifiers. The basic effect is clear, but these behavioral details are material 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?

A single sentence with no filler; the action and direction are front-loaded. 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?

Given the simple two-parameter schema and presence of an output schema, the description is mostly adequate, but it omits the key side effect on the target object's existing modifiers. The absence of annotations raises the importance of that missing behavioral detail.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by clarifying that source is the object providing modifiers and target is the object receiving them, using 'from source object to target object'. It does not give identifier format or merge behavior, but for two simple string parameters the roles are meaningfully specified.

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 states a specific action ('Copy'), a precise resource ('all modifiers'), and a clear direction ('from source object to target object'). This is distinct from related siblings like move_modifier or add_modifier, so an agent can tell what it does without inspecting the schema.

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 is implied by the verb 'copy' (use when all modifiers should be duplicated from one object to another), but the description gives no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over move_modifier, add_modifier, or remove_modifier, and no exclusions or caveats.

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