glue_selected_items

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It discloses the core effect (contiguous items are merged per track), but it does not state that this is a destructive project mutation, whether it is undoable, or what happens if no items are selected.

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 three short sentences and front-loads the action and effect. Every sentence earns its place by naming the operation, explaining the result, and giving a usage context.

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 zero-parameter, no-output tool with no annotations, the description is largely sufficient: it names the operation, describes the resulting item grouping, and notes when it is useful. It could still mention selection prerequisites or undo behavior, but the missing pieces are minor for this simple action.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to describe. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter-level detail.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'Glue (consolidate) currently selected items.' It also explains the resulting transformation, 'Each contiguous group on a track becomes one item,' which clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like split_items_at_time or move_selected_items.

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 offers one contextual usage note, 'Useful after a lot of editing,' but does not specify when not to use the tool, prerequisites such as needing a selection, or any alternative tools. Usage is implied rather than fully guided.

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