visual_duplicate

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

No annotations exist, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as naming conventions, overwriting behavior, or side effects. The 'dryRun' parameter hints at validation but is not explained.

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 short, which is concise, but it sacrifices completeness. It lacks structure and does not use sentences effectively to convey necessary information.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is grossly incomplete. It does not define what duplicating entails, how it behaves, or what the return value is.

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 coverage is 0% and the description provides no explanation for any of the four parameters. Essential details like what 'dryRun' does are missing.

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 'Duplicate a visual,' which identifies the action and resource. However, the 'Planned for Phase 2' note may confuse agents about availability, and it does not distinguish from similar tools like 'page_duplicate'.

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 usage context provided. The description lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., visual_add, page_duplicate) or prerequisites (e.g., existing visual).

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