copy_range

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It helpfully discloses default copy semantics (values, formulas, formatting) and the valuesOnly variant, but it does not state that target contents are overwritten, whether the operation is reversible, or what permissions or error conditions apply. This is a meaningful mutation gap.

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 sentences with zero waste, and the main action is front-loaded before the default-behavior clarification. Every sentence 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?

For a five-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It explains copy semantics but omits overwrite behavior, cross-sheet implications of sheetName, and what the tool returns.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all five parameters thoroughly. The description reinforces the default behavior and the valuesOnly effect, but adds no syntax or format details beyond what the schema provides.

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 verb and resource ('Copy a source range to a target range in the live workbook'), which is clearly distinguishable from siblings like write_range or clear_range. It lacks explicit sibling differentiation, but the copy operation is unique enough that an agent can identify it.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as write_range, format_range, or insert_or_delete_range. The description implies it is a copy operation but does not state preconditions, exclusions, or the scenario where copying is preferred over writing.

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