operations_copyfile

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It fails to disclose key behaviors such as whether it overwrites existing files, preserves metadata, handles errors, or requires specific permissions. The description is too minimal for a file copy 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 one sentence, succinct and to the point. However, it could include more details without becoming verbose; still, it is well-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 no output schema, 6 parameters, and no annotations, the description should provide more context about behavior (overwrite, errors), return values, and common use cases. It only states the basic 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with clear parameter descriptions. The tool description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, fulfilling the baseline expectation.

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 action (copy), resource (single file/object), and the source/destination remote and path. It effectively differentiates from sibling tools like operations_movefile (move) and operations_copyurl (copy from URL).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like sync_copy for directory copies. Does not mention limitations (single file only) or prerequisites (e.g., remotes must be configured).

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