clone_area

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'clone a cuboid region' but does not disclose whether the source is copied or moved, what happens to the destination area, or any side effects. The cloneMode enum hints at 'move' but the description omits this behavior.

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 with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the core purpose without redundancy.

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?

This is a complex tool with 11 parameters, 2 enums, and no output schema. The description barely explains the operation, leaving out how maskMode/cloneMode affect behavior and what the result looks like. Though the schema is detailed, the description alone is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's capabilities and implications.

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 each parameter is individually documented. The description adds only a high-level context (source and destination) but does not clarify the more nuanced parameters like maskMode or cloneMode beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 (clone), the resource (cuboid region), and the operation (from a source to a destination position). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like fill or setblock, which perform different operations.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not explain when to use clone_area compared to alternatives such as fill, setblock, or move_control, nor does it mention any prerequisites or constraints.

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