Copy Drive File

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the tool is understood to be a safe write operation. The description adds the return structure (id, name, mimeType, webViewLink) but does not disclose additional behavioral details like permission requirements or side effects. This adds some value but not deep context.

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 well-organized with Args, Returns, and Examples sections, making it easy to scan. It is front-loaded with a clear purpose and avoids unnecessary prose. The Args section duplicates schema information slightly, but it is not excessive.

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 tool is simple and the description provides all essential information: purpose, parameters, defaults, return structure, and examples. Although no output schema is provided in the structured data, the Returns field fills that gap. The description is complete for a copy operation.

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?

The input schema covers all three parameters with full descriptions, so schema coverage is 100%. The description repeats the parameter details and adds usage examples, but does not provide new semantic meaning beyond the schema. This meets the baseline for high coverage.

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 opens with 'Create a copy of a file in Google Drive', which clearly states the verb+resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like drive_get_file (read) and drive_list_files (list), and it stands apart from sheets_duplicate_sheet which targets sheets.

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 usage is clear from the description and examples (copying with a new name or into a folder), which implies when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or contrast with alternative tools, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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