obs-duplicate-scene-item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that transform and crop information are copied, which is useful, but does not say what the duplication returns, whether the new item is enabled/locked, what permissions are needed, or how the destination scene parameters affect the operation.

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, efficient sentence with the core action front-loaded and no filler. It is appropriately concise, though its brevity contributes to the completeness gaps elsewhere.

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?

This is a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, operating across five parameters. The schema covers parameter names and purposes, but the description does not explain the result of duplication, destination-side effects, or relevant constraints, so it is not complete enough for an agent to invoke it confidently in all cases.

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 input schema already explains all five parameters, including sceneName, sceneUuid, sceneItemId, and destination fields. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Duplicates a scene item'. It also adds useful scope by noting that transform and crop info are copied, which helps distinguish duplication from plain creation. It stops short of explicitly naming the sibling create-scene-item as the alternative, so it is clear but not maximally 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?

There is no explicit guidance about when to use this tool rather than create-scene-item, or about prerequisites such as needing the source scene/item to exist. The intended use is implied by 'Duplicates', but an agent receives no when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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