search_clips

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

The description mentions 'recursively across all media-pool bins', which provides useful behavioral context. However, without annotations, it lacks details on return format, performance implications, or what happens if no matches are found.

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 sentence of 12 words, concise and front-loaded with the action verb 'Search'. Every word is necessary and efficient.

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?

The description is complete for a simple search tool. It covers the operation and scope. An output schema exists, so return values are presumably documented elsewhere, reducing the need for the description to cover them.

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 single 'query' parameter is not described in the schema, but the tool description indicates it searches 'clip names and properties', adding basic meaning. However, it does not specify whether the search is substring, case-sensitive, or supports regex.

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's purpose: searching clip names and properties recursively across media-pool bins. It uses a specific verb ('search') and resource ('clips'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'list_clips' which likely lists without search.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. It is implied that this tool is for searching, but there is no mention of when not to use it or which sibling tools to consider instead.

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