duplicate_scene

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

The description discloses side effects: 'creates new content and increases the scene count; later scene indices shift to make room.' Annotations show destructiveHint: false, which is consistent. No contradictions.

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every sentence adds value. No unnecessary words.

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?

With one parameter, full schema coverage, and an output schema present, the description covers the tool's purpose, side effects, and alternatives thoroughly. It is complete for an AI agent to understand when and how to use it.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's description of scene_index; it only explains the tool's overall behavior, not the parameter itself.

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 'Insert a copy of one Session scene, including every clip in its row.' It uses a specific verb (insert copy) and identifies the resource (scene). It also distinguishes from sibling tools by mentioning duplicate_track and duplicate_clip_to.

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 explicitly tells when to use alternatives: 'Use duplicate_track for a whole track or duplicate_clip_to for one clip.' It also suggests a use case: 'Use the new scene as an editable section variation.'

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