copy_modal_volume_files

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions that it can copy one or multiple files to a directory, but it does not specify whether files are overwritten, what happens with non-existent sources, or any side effects. The return value description is minimal ('a dictionary'). Critical behavioral details are missing.

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 structured with Args and Returns sections, making it easy to parse. It is concise but covers the core operation. However, the Returns section is somewhat vague.

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 that an output schema exists (though not shown), the description need not fully explain return values. However, it still lacks important behavioral context like error handling, permissions, and overwrite behavior. For a copy operation, this is a moderate 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 description effectively compensates by explaining the volume_name parameter and the meaning of the paths array (last is destination, others are sources). It also provides an example, which adds clarity beyond the raw schema.

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 tool's action ('Copy files within a Modal volume') and distinguishes it from sibling tools like put_modal_volume_file (upload) and remove_modal_volume_file (delete). The verb 'copy' and resource 'Modal volume files' are specific and 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 explains the argument structure (last path is destination, others are sources) but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as put_modal_volume_file or get_modal_volume_file. Usage context is implied but not explicit.

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