duplicate_template

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden: it does not say whether the source template is mutated, what permissions are needed, or that a new template is created with a new id. The only real disclosure is the default naming convention, which is helpful but thin for a mutation tool.

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?

A single sentence with the operation front-loaded and the parenthetical adding genuine information rather than filler. It is efficient, though its brevity leaves gaps handled in other dimensions.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the agent is left without knowing the return value (presumably the new template id) or whether the copy is shallow or includes fields. The description does not fill this gap.

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 0%, so the schema gives only titles and a null default for 'name'. The description compensates for one parameter by explaining the default-copy naming behavior, but adds nothing about template_id beyond what the tool name implies, leaving half the parameters undocumented.

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 a specific verb ('Copy') on a specific resource ('a template'), so the operation is unambiguous. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings such as create_template or create_from_starter, which is the only thing separating it from a 5.

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 statement of when to duplicate rather than create_template or create_from_starter, and no prerequisites or exclusions. Only the implicit reading of the verb tells the agent when to reach for it.

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