copy_path

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states 'This modifies the computer' (mutation) and discloses the overwrite requirement. This adds useful safety and operational context beyond the schema, though it does not cover recursion or error 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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by an essential caveat. Every word earns its place with no 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?

Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description suffices for basic copy operations. However, it omits details like recursive directory copying, creation of parent directories, and error behavior when overwrite is false, leaving some operational gaps.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'file or directory' to imply source/destination and explains the overwrite parameter's requirement. However, it does not provide detailed semantics for source and destination paths beyond their names, so compensation is partial.

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 states 'Copy a file or directory' with a specific verb and resource, making it clear this copies paths. This distinguishes from siblings like move_path and write_text_file, which involve moving or writing content.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (copying files or directories) and states a key condition (existing destinations require overwrite=true). However, it does not explicitly compare with alternatives like move_path or mention when not to use it, so it misses explicit exclusions.

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