capcut_set_props

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states that properties are set, but omits details such as whether the operation is idempotent, requires an existing draft, or has side effects on other segment properties. The mutation implied by 'Set' is not elaborated.

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 sentence that immediately states the verb and resource, with a concise list of affected properties. Every word contributes to the meaning, and it is well-front-loaded.

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 12 parameters, 2 required parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and 0% schema coverage, this description is far too sparse. It provides a high-level overview but omits essential information like parameter formats, defaults, and required couplings, making it insufficient for correct invocation.

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 groups parameters into categories (transform, opacity, volume, speed, visibility), which helps map properties like posX/scale/rotation to 'transform'. However, it lacks units, allowed ranges, or relationships between parameters (e.g., scale vs scaleX/scaleY), leaving significant ambiguity.

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 ('Set') and resource ('a segment'), and lists the property categories (transform, opacity, volume, speed, visibility). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like capcut_add_video or capcut_move_segment, making its purpose unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., capcut_move_segment for position changes). The description does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or recommended contexts, leaving the agent to infer usage from the schema alone.

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