linear_duplicateIssue

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

Annotations indicate this is a mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and not destructive (destructiveHint=false). However, the description adds no further behavioral context: e.g., whether the original issue is modified, what fields are duplicated, or if any side effects occur. Beyond the annotation signals, the description is silent.

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 very concise at three words, which is efficient but lacks substance. While it avoids verbosity, it barely earns its place by stating the action; a slightly more informative phrase would improve without sacrificing conciseness.

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 that this is a mutation tool with an output schema (not shown), the description should clarify the operation's scope—such as what properties are copied, whether the duplicate is linked to the original, or any required permissions. The current description is insufficient for a complete understanding.

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 100% of parameters (only one: issueId) with a clear description. The tool description does not add any additional meaning or context to the parameter beyond what the schema provides.

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 'Duplicate an issue' states a clear action (duplicate) on a specific resource (issue). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like create, update, and archive, as duplication is a distinct operation.

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 context is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like linear_createIssue (for creating a new issue from scratch) or linear_archiveIssue. No when-not-to-use or prerequisite information is given.

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