delete_range

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full load and does disclose the non-obvious ripple side effect: overlays and notes after the range shift left, and the cut spans clip boundaries. It omits reversibility (undo availability) and whether the affected tracks include audio and video alike.

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?

Two short sentences with the operation and its consequence front-loaded first and the range semantics second; no filler or repetition.

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 destructive, annotation-free tool with three undocumented parameters and no output schema, the description covers the ripple behavior well but leaves units, the project argument, and undo/irreversibility unresolved. Adequate, but an agent could still call it with wrong units or wrong assumptions about undo.

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 the description must compensate. It clarifies that start/end form a timeline range (square brackets suggesting inclusive bounds) and that the range may cross clips, but time units (seconds vs. frames) are unstated and the "project" parameter is never mentioned at all.

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?

"Ripple-delete [start, end] of the timeline" names a specific verb and a specific resource region, and the parenthetical examples (a pause, a fumbled sentence) make the intent concrete. It implicitly differs from delete_clip via "range" and "works across clip boundaries," though no sibling is named explicitly.

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 examples imply the use case (removing dead air or mistakes), but the description never states when to choose this over delete_clip, split_clip, or remove_silences, nor any precondition. Usage is inferable rather than instructed.

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