apply_drx_grade

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only describes what the tool does and its parameters, but does not mention side effects (e.g., overwriting grades), error conditions (e.g., invalid drx_path), or resource requirements (e.g., existing clips on timeline).

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 concise, with a single primary sentence and parameter documentation in a bullet-like format. Every sentence provides essential information without redundancy.

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 the existence of an output schema, the description does not need to detail return values. However, it lacks context about the prerequisite state (e.g., must have a timeline with clips) and potential errors (e.g., invalid grade file). It is adequate but not fully complete.

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 description compensates for 0% schema coverage by clearly explaining all three parameters: drx_path (path to file), grade_mode (enum with numeric values and meanings), and clip_indices (optional, 1-based, default behavior). This adds significant meaning 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 clearly states the action (apply), the resource (DRX grade file), and the target (timeline clips). It distinguishes from sibling grading tools like copy_grade and reset_grades.

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 explains when to use the clip_indices parameter and what happens when it's omitted. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives or mention any prerequisites (e.g., requirement of an active timeline).

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