Duplicate a Rootr node (deep copy)

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) indicate a non-read, non-destructive mutation. The description adds that it performs a deep copy and returns the new node, but does not detail side effects, permission requirements, or limit constraints. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 two sentences, no filler, and front-loads the core purpose. Every word adds value.

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 3-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains input and return value. It could mention the structure of the returned node, but overall it is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 100%, so the parameters are already well-defined. The description reiterates the purpose of 'targetWorkspaceId' and the deep copy behavior, but adds no new semantic meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 deep-copies a Rootr node (document or folder tree) to the same location or a different workspace. 'Duplicate' in the name and 'deep-copy' in the description make the purpose unambiguous. Among siblings, no other duplication tool exists, so it is well-differentiated.

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 implies usage for duplicating nodes, mentioning 'next to the original' or 'into another workspace', but lacks explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives or prerequisites like user permissions. However, the tool name and uniqueness among siblings make the context clear enough for selection.

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