copy_model_version

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, and the description confirms it's a write operation. It discloses that the destination model is created if missing and the promotion pattern. However, it does not clarify whether the source version remains unchanged or if it's a copy vs move.

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 concise and includes an example. The Args section somewhat duplicates schema but adds clarity. No extraneous content.

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 no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, parameters, and an example. For a simple mutation tool with 3 required params, it is sufficiently complete.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description's Args section and example add meaning to each parameter (source model/version, destination model). The example demonstrates usage.

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 it promotes a model version to another registered model, with the MLflow 3 promotion pattern and auto-creation of destination. This is distinct from siblings like delete_model_version or register_model.

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?

The description mentions the MLflow 3 promotion pattern but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like transition_model_version_stage. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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