duplicate_page

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Duplicate a page' implies mutation but does not state whether the original page remains unchanged, whether the copy is deep or shallow, or any side effects. This is a significant transparency gap for a mutating tool.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded, but it is under-specified for a tool with a required parameter and an optional position parameter. It is not overly verbose, but the brevity sacrifices necessary context, making it minimally acceptable.

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 lack of annotations, no output schema, and only a one-line description, the context is incomplete. The description does not explain the duplicate behavior (e.g., whether content is copied, where it is inserted) or provide enough information for an agent to use it correctly without guesswork.

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 description adds no meaning beyond the input schema. The schema documents pageIndex but leaves position undocumented (50% coverage). The description could have clarified the position parameter's purpose or the default 'after', but it remains silent, failing to compensate for the schema gap.

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 uses a specific verb ('duplicate') and resource ('page'), clearly indicating the action. It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_page and delete_page, but lacks explicit scope details such as where the duplicate is placed or that it copies all content, preventing a higher score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_page or delete_page. There is no context about use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without clear selection criteria.

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