duplicate_composition

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose side effects, permissions, or result behavior. It only says 'duplicate' with no indication of whether the original is preserved, what properties are copied, or what the tool returns.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single sentence with no unnecessary words. It is well-structured and directly states the action.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the result of duplication, whether it returns a new ID, or any preconditions. The overall context is missing, making it difficult for an agent to know what to expect.

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 provides minimal descriptions (e.g., 'Composition ID', 'Name for the duplicate', 'Composition name'), but the tool description adds no further meaning. The purpose of 'compName' is ambiguous—it could be the original name or a redundant field—and the description does not clarify.

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 'Duplicate a composition' is a clear verb-object phrase that precisely states the tool's function, distinguishing it from siblings like create_composition or delete_composition.

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 (e.g., create_composition). It lacks any contextual cues such as 'when you need a copy of an existing composition'.

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