variable_copy

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry burden. It describes the copy operation and overwrite flag but does not explicitly state that it modifies the target environment, potential destructive behavior, or permissions needed. Could be more transparent about mutation and risks.

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?

Well-structured with emojis, bullet points, and clear sections. Front-loaded purpose. Some verbosity due to multiple sections, but overall efficient and scannable.

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?

No output schema, so description should cover return value. It does not describe what the tool returns (e.g., success message, count of copied variables). Provides prerequisites and next steps, but misses result explanation for a tool with 5 parameters.

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 100%, baseline 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond schema: source/target environment IDs from project_info, serviceId optional for shared variables, overwrite flag. No further parameter context.

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 copies variables from one environment to another, using specific verbs and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like variable_set (single variable updates) and variable_list.

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 explicit sections: Best for (environment migration, sharing, duplication), Not for (single variable updates, temp changes), Prerequisites (service_list), Alternatives (variable_set), Next steps (deployment_trigger, service_restart), and Related tools. Excellent guidance on when to use and when not.

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