capcut_move_segment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the move action without mentioning preconditions (e.g., open draft), side effects on the timeline (e.g., overlapping segments), persistence, or return values. This leaves critical behavioral traits undisclosed for a mutation operation.

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 a single clear sentence with no wasted words. It succinctly conveys the operation's core without redundancy, achieving high conciseness and appropriate structure.

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 absence of an output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about the operation's effects, return value, and prerequisites. It only describes the basic action, leaving the agent unaware of potential side effects, persistence behavior, or expected outcomes, making it incomplete for a mutation tool.

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%, so the description must compensate. It does add meaning for atSec ('new start time') and trackIndex ('another track'), but it does not explain the draft or segmentId identifiers, nor specify units (e.g., seconds) or indexing. The compensation is partial; some parameters remain semantically under-specified.

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 identifies the action ('Move') and the resource ('a segment'), while specifying the key aspects: a new start time and optionally another track. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like trim_segment (changes duration), delete_segment (removes), and set_props (modifies properties).

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 implies usage for repositioning segments but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. It lacks guidance like 'use this when you need to change a segment's position instead of trimming or deleting.' The context is clear but not explicitly scoped relative to other tools.

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