ripple_delete

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

The description clearly implies a destructive effect by deleting intervals, trimming clips, and closing gaps, yet the annotation destructiveHint is false. This is an annotation contradiction and is actively misleading to an agent evaluating call safety.

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 brief, front-loaded with the primary effect, and adds only relevant caveats. It is trimmed and readable, though it sacrifices too much information for the parameter count and complexity involved.

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?

Given no output schema, no parameter descriptions, and sparse annotations, the description is not complete enough for an agent. It explains the core operation and one edge case, but leaves dry_run, include_plan, return behavior, error states, and up-front conditions undocumented.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any of the six parameters. Required fields like name, new_name, start, and end remain ambiguous, especially new_name, which is unintuitive for a delete operation.

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 names a specific action and resource: deleting a timeline interval from all tracks, trimming crossing clips, and closing the gap. This is clear and distinct from siblings like reorder_track or apply_motion_preset, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from similar edit/delete tools.

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 does not say when to choose ripple_delete over sibling tools, what prerequisites apply, or in which context ripple deletion is appropriate. The caveat about animated intervals is a limitation, not usage guidance.

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