operations_copyfile

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It explains the async mode and jobid/polling behavior, which is valuable. But it does not mention overwrite semantics, what the synchronous call returns, or error conditions, leaving gaps for a file-copy operation.

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 short and front-loaded, but the opening 'Copy a single file — Copies one object' is somewhat redundant. The important async warning is clearly highlighted. Overall it is concise with minimal waste.

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?

For a 6-parameter operation with no output schema, the description covers the core usage (copy from source to destination) and the crucial async guidance. It lacks details on synchronous return values and edge cases, but the schema fills in parameter specifics, making it sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, providing a baseline of 3. The tool description adds meaningful context: it explains the source/destination remote/path structure and emphasizes the `_async` parameter's importance for long operations and its jobid return value, going 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 opens with 'Copy a single file' which is a specific verb and resource, immediately distinguishing it from sibling tools like operations_movefile (move vs copy) and operations_deletefile. It clearly states the action: copying one object from a source remote/path to a destination remote/path.

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 includes explicit guidance to use `_async: true` for long-running operations and mentions polling with `job_status`. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives like movefile, though the action itself differentiates.

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