reels_timeline

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

The annotations declare destructiveHint=false, but the description explicitly supports a 'remove' action that deletes a shot from the timeline. That is a direct behavioral conflict: an agent relying on the annotation could perform a removal without expecting a destructive change. The description does add atomicity and index semantics, but the contradiction dominates.

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 tight sentences front-load the core operation and then add key constraints. There is no filler, and the most important timing/index information is easy to find.

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 mutation tool with a large nested shot schema, six parameters, and no output schema, the description is far too sparse. It omits how revision works, what each action expects, and what effect removal has on the project state.

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 for six undocumented parameters. It only clarifies that index is zero-based in the resulting timeline and that removing the last shot is rejected; it does not explain action semantics, revision, projectId, shotId, or the large nested shot object.

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 states specific verbs (insert, remove, move) and a clear resource (one shot in a timeline) with atomic scope. It does not explicitly distinguish this tool from siblings like reels_edit_shot, so an agent must infer that the difference is timeline ordering versus shot property editing.

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?

It gives a useful constraint (removing the last shot is rejected) and the three supported actions, which implies when the tool applies. However, it does not explain when to choose this over reels_edit_shot or reels_create, nor does it clarify which parameters are required for each action.

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