Clone Node

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

The description adds that it produces a new node id, but does not disclose details like whether all properties are copied, if the original is affected, or any required permissions. The openWorldHint annotation signals unknown side effects, but the description does not mitigate that.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently communicates the core functionality with no unnecessary 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?

The description covers the essential purpose and outcome. With an output schema present, the return value is implied. It could mention whether it's a shallow or deep clone, but it's still fairly complete for a simple tool.

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 3. The description mentions optional x/y parameters, adding some context beyond the schema. However, nodeId and nodeName are not elaborated beyond their schema descriptions.

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 verb 'duplicate' and the resource 'node', with the outcome 'produces a new node id'. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like node_delete or node_rename by specifying duplication.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like node_insert_child or node_group. The description does not mention when not to use it or provide any context for selecting it over other node operations.

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