clone_pattern

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

Annotations already indicate the tool is mutating (readOnlyHint=false) but non-destructive. The description adds that a new index is created and that the copy is meant as a starting point for variation, but it does not explain what is returned, such as the new pattern index, which matters because there is no output schema.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It immediately communicates the action and destination.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the basic action but omits important context such as how to identify the source pattern and what the caller gets back after cloning. It is minimally adequate but leaves meaningful gaps.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the bare "pattern" integer parameter. The description only says a pattern is copied; it does not clarify whether the parameter is the source pattern index, its valid range, or how patterns are identified.

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: "Copies a pattern to a new index." This clearly distinguishes the core action from update_pattern or remove_pattern, though it does not explicitly name those siblings as alternatives.

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?

"As a starting point for a variation" gives an implied use case for cloning rather than creating or editing. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose clone_pattern over add_pattern or update_pattern, nor any prerequisites.

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