Copy an object within or across Scaleway Object Storage buckets

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

The description correctly states the operation is server-side and not re-uploading, which adds context beyond the idempotentHint=true annotation. However, it does not elaborate on idempotency behavior (e.g., overwriting if destination exists) or permissions/ACL requirements. The description aligns with annotations (no contradiction), and the annotation set already conveys safety hints (non-destructive, idempotent).

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 two terse sentences: the first defines the core operation with technical advantage, the second enforces a critical constraint. No filler words. Every sentence adds unique, necessary information for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 the schema covers all parameters, annotations provide idempotency and non-destructive hints, and there is no output schema, the description sufficiently frames the copy operation. It could optionally mention that copy works for any object size (since server-side) or that it can serve as a rename, but these are minor additions. The description does not leave critical gaps for an AI agent to misuse the tool.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage, and the tool description adds context that all parameters relate to a region-constrained copy. The description explicitly confirms that source and destination must be in the same region, echoing the region parameter's note. No ambiguity remains about what each parameter does or how they relate to the operation.

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 a server-side copy operation for Scaleway S3 objects, specifying the verb 'copy', the resource 'object', and the technical behavior (no download/re-upload). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like scaleway_s3_put_object or scaleway_s3_get_object by focusing on copying between buckets/keys.

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 explicitly notes that source and destination must be in the same region and that cross-region copy is out of scope. It implicitly rules out direct upload/download. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling S3 tools like scaleway_s3_put_object (which uploads) or scaleway_s3_delete_object (which removes), nor does it mention when to use this tool for renames vs. copying across buckets.

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