clone_node

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

With no annotations, the description alone must disclose side effects and constraints. 'Deep-clone' implies a write operation but does not specify what happens to the scene file, whether changes are saved, or what the return value is. It lacks details about undo behavior, name collisions, or cross-scene cloning, leaving significant behavioral ambiguity.

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 a single concise sentence with no wasted words, and it front-loads the key action. It earns its place by immediately conveying the tool's essence, though it omits contextual details that are scored separately.

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 tool with 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain the return value, side effects on the scene file, or how the clone source and parent path interact, making it hard for an agent to fully anticipate the tool's behavior.

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 already describes all 4 parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what the schema provides, so it neither enhances nor detracts from the schema's clarity.

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 (deep-clone) and resource (a node in a scene), which is specific and distinguishes it from related tools like duplicate_scene or duplicate_resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools such as editor_duplicate_node or duplicate_scene, so the purpose is clear but lacks explicit contrast.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like duplicate_scene or editor_duplicate_node. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or context, leaving the agent without explicit decision criteria.

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