capcut_split_clip

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It usefully discloses that the result is two linked segments at an exact timestamp, which is beyond a generic 'split' statement. However, it does not mention reversibility, whether any content is lost, or what happens if split_time_seconds falls outside the clip's duration.

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 efficient sentence that front-loads the core action, then adds a clarifying metaphor and practical use cases. Every clause earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 relatively simple tool with fully covered parameters, the description provides enough for an agent to understand the operation and its purpose. It does not explain the return value or edge cases, but the missing details are minor given the schema's completeness and the operation's straightforward nature.

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 100%, so the parameters are already well documented. The description adds minor context about exact timeline timing, but it does not materially enhance the parameter semantics beyond the 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 uses a specific verb ('Splits') with a specific resource ('a video, audio, or text clip') and a precise mechanism ('timeline razor / blade tool'). It clearly differentiates this from sibling operations like trim_clip or remove_clip by describing the split-into-linked-segments behavior.

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 use cases: cutting out pauses, pacing edits, and inserting B-roll. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is strong enough for an agent to select this tool for split operations.

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