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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is partly covered. The description adds useful side-effect context that linked clips move with the clip and that the edit result is returned, but it does not elaborate on overwrite/ripple behavior beyond what the schema provides.

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 action and destination, and ends with a useful pointer to the server instructions for return details. There is no wasted wording.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not explain return values in depth, and the annotations carry key safety hints. However, for an 8-parameter timeline mutation with several behavioral options, the description leaves usage against sibling tools and the semantics of required parameters largely to the schema.

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 63%, so the schema documents most optional parameters, including mode, ripple, preview, and other_tracks in detail. The description only adds destination semantics for the frame and optional track; it does not explain clip_id or add meaning beyond the schema for the required timeline handle.

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 a specific verb and resource: move a clip to a frame, optionally to another track, with linked clips moving too. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like clip.slide, clip.slip, or clip.roll.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as clip.slide, clip.slip, or range.extract. It implies repositioning, but leaves the agent to infer when a move is appropriate and when another timeline-editing tool should be used instead.

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