agent-tool

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

No annotations provided, yet description fully discloses critical behavioral traits: atomic write mechanism (temp file + rename), permission preservation, recursive directory handling, and Windows-specific locked file handling (renaming aside before replacing). Excellent safety-relevant transparency.

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?

Five sentences, zero waste. Front-loaded with purpose, followed by implementation details (atomicity, recursion), then parameter guidance. Dense but readable; every sentence adds value beyond structured fields.

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?

Thorough coverage for a filesystem tool: explains mechanism, permissions, recursion, dry-run behavior, and platform quirks (Windows). No output schema exists; minor gap on error behavior when overwrite=false and destination exists, but parameter descriptions imply failure.

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 100% coverage, establishing baseline 3. Description adds valuable usage context for boolean flags: explains dry_run as 'preview' and gives specific scenario for overwrite ('updating a running binary'). Elevates beyond schema basics without redundancy.

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?

Opens with specific verb 'Copies' + resource 'file or directory' + scope 'to a new location'. Clearly distinguishes from sibling 'rename' (which moves) and 'backup' (which implies versioning) by emphasizing this creates a duplicate while preserving the source.

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 guidance on when to use specific parameters: 'Use dry_run=true to preview' and 'Use overwrite=true when updating a running binary'. Lacks explicit naming of alternatives (e.g., when to use 'backup' instead), but the Windows-specific guidance for locked files is highly actionable.

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