rhino_save_copy

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does mention the important side-effect of not changing the active file path, but it does not explain behavior around overwriting, file extension handling, or the structure of the returned command result.

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 concise and front-loaded, with the core purpose stated immediately and parameter explanations kept brief. No redundant or filler content is present.

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 description covers the essential invocation context, including the optional folder and the return type ('Dict with command result'). Since an output schema exists, the lack of detailed return field explanations is acceptable.

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?

Each parameter is described beyond a bare name: controller is identified as the Rhino instance, file_name as the desired filename or path, and folder as an optional override. Since the schema has no parameter descriptions, the tool description fully compensates.

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 ('Save a copy'), the target ('current document'), and the key distinction ('without changing the active file path'). This effectively differentiates it from related tools like rhino_save and rhino_save_as.

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 clear context for when to use the tool: when a copy is needed while preserving the current file path. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the side-effect constraint provides practical usage guidance.

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