copy_effects

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing side effects. It does not mention whether copying modifies the source layer, replaces existing effects on the target, or requires any prerequisites, leaving the behavior opaque.

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 concise sentence with no superfluous words. It is easy to read and lacks clutter.

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 description is extremely sparse and does not cover important context such as return values, error handling, or how effects are copied (e.g., whether they are referenced or duplicated). Given the absence of an output schema and annotations, this lack of completeness severely hampers usability.

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 lists seven parameters but provides no descriptions, and the tool description does not clarify their roles. It does not explain the relationship between names and indices, nor whether effectIndices is optional, leaving the agent without essential parameter information.

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 clearly states the action (copy) and the resource (effects) with a specific source and destination. It is distinct from sibling tools like apply_effect or remove_effect, making its intended function unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as apply_effect or duplicate_effect. It does not mention any specific scenarios or edge cases, leaving the agent without clear usage criteria.

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