files_copy_file

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It simply states 'Create a copy of a file' without any details on where the copy is placed, what happens if the name already exists, whether permissions are preserved, or what the response contains. This is a minimal tautological statement that provides no behavioral insight.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the key action. However, it is so minimal that it borders on under-specification rather than true conciseness, so it doesn't earn a 5.

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 simple tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain key behavior like default naming, destination, or return value. The schema covers parameters, but the overall operational context is missing, making it hard for an agent to predict outcomes.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both 'file_id' and 'name'. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already explains, 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 clearly states the action ('Create a copy') and the resource ('a file'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like files_move_file and files_delete_file. However, it lacks any additional scope or destination context, so it doesn't fully reach the level of 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of copying versus moving, or any prerequisites or exclusions. The tool name implies duplication, but the description doesn't explicitly state appropriate usage contexts.

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