drive_copy

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

The description goes beyond the annotations (idempotentHint: false, destructiveHint: false) by adding that authentication is required, emphasizing the original is preserved (not a move), and warning about storage costs for large folder trees. These are valuable behavioral traits not present in the structured annotations.

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 four sentences, each adding meaningful information: the core function, authentication, non-move behavior, and usage caution. It is front-loaded with the purpose and contains no redundant wording.

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 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, authentication, and a caution. It does not specify what happens if the destination path already exists or what the response format is, leaving a minor gap, but the overall context is strong.

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?

Both parameters have comprehensive schema descriptions with examples, covering 100% of the schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 applies due to high schema coverage.

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 copies a file or folder to another location on Proton Drive, using the specific verb 'copy' and resource. It explicitly differentiates from the sibling drive_move by stating 'the original is preserved — this is not a move,' making the purpose 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?

It provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use drive_move when you want to relocate without keeping the original' and a warning against duplicating large folder trees due to storage cost. This covers both when to use and when not to use, naming the alternative tool directly.

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