copy_range

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that the workbook may be opened twice when paste_values_only is True, explains the difference between copying formulas versus values, and mentions the return success message. It does not discuss overwriting behavior or permission requirements, but the provided context is substantive.

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 well-structured with labeled Args and Notes sections. Every sentence provides necessary information, and the parameter explanations are compact. The Notes section adds a valuable behavioral caveat without unnecessary padding.

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?

For an 8-parameter tool with no annotations and no schema descriptions, the description covers the core invocation details well: parameters, behavior, and return type. It could be more complete by disclosing whether the destination range is fully overwritten or merged, but the provided information is largely sufficient for correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so effectively by explaining all 8 parameters, including the meaning of dest_range as a top-left target with an example ('C1') and the nuanced behavior of paste_values_only versus copy_values. This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema property names.

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's function: 'Copy a range of cells to a destination range (same workbook or across sheets).' This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from siblings like transpose_range and copy_cell_format, and it explicitly notes the cross-sheet capability.

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 implies usage through its purpose statement and parameter list, but it does not explicitly explain when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as write_cells or copy_cell_format. The Notes section provides a caveat about paste_values_only, but no direct comparison or exclusionary guidance is given.

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