copy_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states the basic non-destructive copy action, but omits behavioral details such as required permissions, duplicate/name-conflict behavior, or confirmation that the original file remains unchanged. This is minimal transparency for a tool with no annotation support.

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 filler. It conveys both the action and the target efficiently, earning every word.

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 low-complexity tool with a fully described schema and no nested objects, the one-sentence description is sufficient for basic invocation. It lacks return-value or permission context, but those are less critical given the simple, non-destructive copy operation and rich schema.

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 100% coverage with descriptive names and descriptions for all four parameters (file_id, folder_id, type, type_id). The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond the already-clear channel/conversation and folder targets, so the baseline 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 'Copies' and identifies both the object ('a file') and the destination ('a folder in a channel or conversation'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like move_file, upload_file, and rename_file.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention cases where move_file or upload_file would be preferable, nor any prerequisites or conditions for using copy_file.

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