copy_to_grid_position

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that it computes offsets, re-creates elements, uses an in-memory cache, and returns new ElementRef objects. It does not cover permissions or error conditions, but provides substantial behavioral context.

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 well-structured with a clear overview, mechanism explanation, and example. It is mostly concise, though the example could be integrated into the explanation. No redundant sentences.

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 parameter count and lack of param descriptions, the description provides a solid understanding of the core operation and return type. It explains caching and offset logic, but omits details on grid_name and edge cases. An output schema exists to capture return structure.

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 description must compensate. It explains the offset parameters (from_x_line, to_x_line, etc.) well with an example, but does not describe element_uuids or grid_name beyond their names. Partial compensation, baseline 3.

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 it copies elements to a new grid position, explains the offset computation, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like move_element by explicitly using 'copy'.

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 for copying elements, but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives like move_element or when not to use. It mentions a prerequisite (elements must be created in this session) which provides some guidance.

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