copy_job_create

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

Annotations already convey that this operation is not read-only and not destructive. The description adds no further behavioral detail such as side effects, required permissions, idempotency, or what happens on success. There is no contradiction with the annotations.

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 entire description is one short, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It efficiently communicates the core operation without wasting words.

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?

With no output schema, the description does not mention what the API returns after creation, such as a copy job ID or full job object. It also omits any indication of follow-up operations or prerequisites beyond the schema, leaving the agent with an incomplete picture for invoking and using the result.

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 100%, so the schema already documents workspaceId, displayName, and description adequately. The tool description does not add any extra parameter meaning, which keeps this at the baseline score of 3.

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 action ('Create'), the resource ('a new copy job'), and the scope ('in a workspace'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like copy_job_update, copy_job_delete, and copy_job_list by indicating it creates rather than modifies, deletes, or reads.

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?

No explicit guidance is provided about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as copy_job_update or copy_job_create_definition. The word 'new' implies creation of a non-existent job, but no exclusions or routing cues are given.

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