duplicate_storage_folder_to_collection

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the super-admin requirement, use of 'reserved admin worker capacity', the safe preview default, the idempotency-key requirement for retries, and the key safety trait 'never deletes destination content'. It omits conflict-handling behavior during execute, keeping it below a 5.

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?

Three tight sentences: identity/scope, then mode default, then safety and key requirement. Front-loaded with the operation and the actor restriction, with zero filler.

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 a six-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers privilege, mode selection, safety, and idempotency. It doesn't describe the preview's return content or job lifecycle, which would fully round it out, but it's close to 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 coverage is 100%, so all six parameters are already documented, including the execute/preview flags and idempotency_key. The description reinforces the preview default and the key requirement but adds no syntax or semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: duplicating a 'folder subtree' into a 'Collection'. It's unambiguous about what gets created. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings, though no sibling performs folder-to-collection duplication, so confusion risk is low.

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?

It states the preview-first workflow ('Defaults to a server preview') and that execute requires a stable idempotency key, plus the super-admin prerequisite. It stops short of naming alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions, but the mode selection guidance is clear.

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