duplicate_node

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states duplication but does not explain what happens to the original, how the duplicate is positioned (e.g., as sibling or child), or whether relationships are preserved. The behavioral impact is insufficiently described.

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 a single concise sentence that directly states the tool's function. It is front-loaded and efficient, though extremely brief. Some additional structural clarity (e.g., listing key effects) would improve it.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, the description should clarify return value or side effects. It only states the basic action, leaving questions about success indicators, error cases, and exact behavior. Incomplete for effective use.

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?

All four parameters are described in the schema (100% coverage), so the description adds no additional meaning. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema fully documents parameter purposes.

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 uses the specific verb 'Duplicate' and identifies the resource as 'a node subtree within a scene', clearly distinguishing this tool from siblings like add_node or delete_node. It communicates exactly what action is performed.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus similar tools like rename_node or reparent_node. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., node must exist) or limitations. The description lacks usage context.

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