drive_copy_file

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

With no annotations provided, the description is the sole source for behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic copy action and optional rename, but does not explain side effects (e.g., whether the copy lands in the same folder), required permissions, or the return value. This leaves significant ambiguity for a tool that creates a new resource.

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 concise and front-loaded, with two short sentences that state the primary action and the key optional parameter. Every word adds value, and there is no redundant or extraneous content.

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 simple copy operation, the description covers the core action, but it lacks mention of return output, destination behavior, or any prerequisites. Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is not fully complete, though it is minimally sufficient for an experienced user.

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%, and the description adds only that the new name is optional, which is already implied by the schema. It does not provide extra meaning or examples beyond the structured parameter descriptions, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the specific verb 'Create a copy' and names the resource ('a file in Google Drive'), which precisely conveys the action. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like drive_rename_file and drive_move_file by focusing on duplication.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or cases where another tool (e.g., drive_rename_file) would be more appropriate.

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