duplicate_entity

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavior disclosure. It adds that duplication includes children and happens in the current level, but it does not explain side effects such as new entity IDs, whether the original remains unchanged, undo behavior, or what exactly happens to child relationships. This falls short for a mutating operation.

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 two concise sentences with no filler. The core action and scope are front-loaded, and the argument semantics follow directly. Every sentence earns its place.

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 tool with one required parameter and an output schema, the description covers the action, scope, and argument adequately. It lacks usage-alternative guidance and deeper side-effect details, but an agent can reasonably select and invoke the tool correctly based on the provided information.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. The Args section defines entity_id as 'The entity ID to duplicate', which adds clear semantic meaning beyond the schema's bare string type. It is minimal, but sufficient for a single parameter.

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 states a specific verb ('Duplicate'), a specific resource ('entity'), and an important scope detail ('and its children', 'current O3DE level'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like create_entity and delete_entity, so an agent can understand what the tool does at a glance.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_entity, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites. It only describes the operation itself, leaving the agent to infer use cases.

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