get_timeline

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It does describe the return content in detail, but it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or safe, nor does it mention preconditions like requiring an active sequence. For a get tool, this is a minor gap, but it could be improved by noting it has no side effects.

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, well-structured sentence. It front-loads the key point ('Full picture of the active sequence') followed by a clear list of included data and a usage tip. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool returns and why it is useful. It enumerates all major data categories (timing, effects, Motion scale) and positions it within the workflow, making it complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema fully documents what is needed. The description adds contextual meaning by explaining the purpose rather than parameter syntax, which satisfies the baseline for no-parameter tools.

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 retrieves the full timeline of the active sequence, specifying exact data types (resolution, frame rate, duration, clips, effects, Motion scale). This distinguishes it from more specific sibling tools like get_clip, which focuses on individual clips.

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 phrase 'The best first call before editing anything' provides clear context on when to use this tool, implying it should precede editing actions. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternative tools or mention when not to use it, but given its role as a comprehensive overview, the guidance is strong.

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