fire_clip

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

No annotations provided. Description only says 'Start playing a clip' without disclosing behavior like clip state changes, audio output, or errors. Lacks behavioral details beyond the action.

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 very short and to the point, with two sentences. While concise, it sacrifices necessary detail; a bit more context would improve it without adding verbosity.

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 tool has 2 integer parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely lacking. It omits success indicators, error conditions, and runtime behavior, making it incomplete for reliable use.

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 description repeats parameter names and adds minimal context ('the index of the track containing the clip'). Schema has 0% coverage, but the description still fails to specify indexing (e.g., 0-based), valid ranges, or side effects of invalid values.

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 'Start playing a clip', clearly indicating the verb (start playing) and resource (a clip). It distinguishes from siblings like 'stop_clip' and 'fire_scene', but does not explicitly differentiate.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'fire_scene' or duplicate/stop. No context about prerequisites or when not to use.

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