duplicate_scene

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

Annotations already cover read-only/destructive/idempotent flags. The description adds that the operation returns the created scene record and implies the original scene is unchanged by describing the result as a copy. No contradiction with 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?

Three short sentences, each with a purpose: action, return value, and usage exclusion. No filler, and the main action is front-loaded.

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 only two simple parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains the return value and the main alternative. It could additionally clarify name-uniqueness behavior, but for a straightforward create-copy tool it is close to complete.

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 fully documents id and name. The description mostly restates the schema's meaning ('by its id', 'new name') without adding non-obvious parameter behavior.

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?

States the specific action 'Duplicate an existing scene by its id' and the result 'giving the copy a new name'. Clearly a scene-copying operation, and the 'When NOT to use' note differentiates it from create_scene.

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?

Explicitly names the alternative create_scene for the empty-scene case, preventing misuse. The operation's own trigger (duplicating an existing scene) is clear from the verb and resource.

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