replicate_record

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and successfully discloses the critical behavioral trait: 'Replicants share the same underlying data — editing one affects all replicants.' It also notes the return value. Missing minor safety hints (permissions, reversibility) but covers the essential mutation semantics.

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?

Four sentences with zero waste: (1) purpose/scope, (2) critical behavioral distinction, (3) required parameter, (4) resolution options and return value. Front-loaded with the core action and efficiently structured.

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 5 parameters with complex lookup logic and no annotations, the description adequately covers the replication model, parameter relationships, and return value. Slightly short on error conditions or edge cases (e.g., invalid destination group), but 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 coverage is 100% so baseline is 3. The description adds significant value by specifying the lookup resolution hierarchy ('uuid preferred'), explaining parameter dependencies (recordId requires databaseName), and clarifying the mutual exclusivity logic of the identification parameters.

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?

Specific verb 'Replicate' + resource 'record' + scope 'within the same database to a destination group'. Crucially distinguishes from sibling 'duplicate_record' by defining replicants as sharing underlying data, making the tool's unique purpose immediately clear.

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?

Explains three valid methods to resolve the source record (uuid preferred, or recordId/databaseName, or recordPath/databaseName) and states the destinationGroupUuid requirement. Implies when to use versus 'duplicate_record' by emphasizing the shared-data behavior, though it doesn't explicitly name the sibling alternative.

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