clear_audio_classification

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the scope of the operation (single clip or folder including nested) but does not mention any side effects (e.g., whether the action is destructive, reversible, or requires specific permissions). It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 very concise yet informative. It starts with a clear purpose statement, then briefly explains operational modes, and ends with parameter details. Every sentence adds value 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 that an output schema exists (not shown), the description is not required to explain return values. However, it could mention prerequisites or confirm that clearing classification is applied immediately. Overall, it provides sufficient context for a simple operation, but misses a note on irreversibility.

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%, but the description provides detailed meaning for both parameters: clip_name is for a single clip, folder_path for a folder hierarchy, and the default behavior when neither is given. This fully compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 action ('Clear audio classification') and the resources it operates on (clip, folder, or current Media Pool folder). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'perform_audio_classification' by indicating the opposite operation.

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 the three modes of operation (clip, folder, or current folder) which guides parameter usage, but it does not provide any when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives like 'perform_audio_classification' for clarifying when to choose this tool.

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