deals_duplicate

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the copy is exact except ID/timestamps, followers not copied, products copied. This adds important behavioral context. However, does not mention permissions, rate limits, or potential side effects beyond the copy behavior.

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?

Moderately concise with clear sections. Sentences are informative, though some redundancy exists (e.g., first two sentences). Front-loaded with core purpose. Bullet points aid readability.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description covers behavior, exclusions, workflow tips, and use cases. It is fairly complete for a duplication tool. Could optionally mention return value format.

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?

Single parameter 'id' with schema description already at 100% coverage. Description adds example usages and reinforces the meaning, but does not provide significant additional semantic depth beyond the 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?

Clearly states 'Duplicate an existing deal' with verb and resource. Distinguishes from siblings like deals_create and deals_update by specifying duplication vs creation/modification.

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?

Provides workflow tips and common use cases, e.g., 'Use deals/get to view the original before duplicating' and 'After duplication, you may want to update the title'. Includes example inputs. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives beyond what's implied.

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