Duplicate a layer

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true, but the description presents the operation as purely additive copying. Nothing in the description explains or supports a destructive side effect, so the description contradicts the annotation. It also does not mention what happens to the cloned node's position or children in edge cases.

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?

Two tight sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the core operation and scope, and the second sentence earns its place by conveying exactly when this tool is preferable.

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 cloning behavior is clear and simple, and the use case is useful. However, the absence of x/y parameter semantics and the unresolved conflict with destructiveHint leave meaningful gaps for an agent invoking the tool 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 already documents nodeId and parentId, and the description reinforces parent semantics. However, x and y are completely undocumented in both the schema and the description, despite being two of the four parameters. With 50% schema coverage, the description should have compensated for x/y but does not.

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 ('copies a node'), the object ('with everything inside it'), and the destination ('same parent or one you name'). This clearly distinguishes cloning from creating, moving, or deleting nodes, and adds useful context beyond the title.

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?

It gives a clear use case: 'the cheapest way to make a second row, card or list item that matches the first exactly.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for selection.

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