item_duplicate

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains cloning preserves source and take properties, returns new clones with item_index, and describes spacing behavior. Could mention if it's destructive or requires permissions, but overall it's transparent.

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?

Well-structured with paragraphs and bullet-like args. Not overly verbose, but each sentence adds value. Could be slightly more concise, but it's effective.

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?

For a simple tool with 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers purpose, usage, parameter details, return behavior, and examples. It is complete.

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 0%, so description fully compensates. Each parameter is explained: item_index (0-based global), count (1-100), spacing_sec (0=back-to-back, examples given). Adds significant meaning beyond schema.

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 tool copies an item N times with fixed spacing, specifying verb (copy) and resource (item). It includes concrete use cases (Porter Robinson stutter) that distinguish it from siblings like item_delete or item_move.

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?

Describes when to use it (stutters, risers, repeats) and explains default and custom spacing. No explicit exclusions or alternative tools mentioned, but the context is clear.

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