add_step

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 implies a mutation ('Append') and describes two kind-specific behaviors, but omits persistence, ordering, project/scene context, side effects, and what happens to existing steps. That is a significant gap for a 10-parameter mutation tool.

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 definition is two short sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, followed by the kind enumeration and the most important kind-specific parameter routing.

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?

The tool is a 10-parameter mutation with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage. The description covers only a fraction of the parameters and omits core context such as scene/project binding, duration semantics, and targets. An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, but the input-side gaps remain substantial.

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% across 10 parameters, so the description must compensate. It usefully explains the kind values, `to` for transform, and zoom/focus for camera_move, but note, targets, duration, scene_id, project_id, and focus_x/focus_y remain unexplained.

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 a specific action and resource: 'Append a timed beat.' The kind enumeration clarifies the domain (write, transform, highlight, fade, camera_move, wait). It does not distinguish this tool from siblings like add_scene or add_text, but the purpose itself is clear.

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 conditional guidance for two kinds ('For transform, set to...'; 'For camera_move, set zoom/focus'), but never says when to use add_step versus alternatives like add_scene, add_shape, or add_text. There are no exclusions or prerequisites.

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