Add markers on detected beats

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

With only 'openWorldHint' annotation, the description carries the burden. It states the tool detects beats and places markers, returning the count, but does not confirm that the audio file remains unmodified, or discuss error handling for invalid paths or missing sequences.

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 two sentences, front-loading the primary action and purpose, then stating the return value. Every sentence adds value with no repetition.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and minimal annotations, the description covers the core functionality and return. It could be improved by mentioning prerequisites (e.g., audio must be imported) or limitations, but it is largely complete for a simple 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so the schema already explains each parameter. The description adds context like 'sensitivity defaults to 0.5' and 'offsetSeconds shifts markers', but does not significantly expand on the schema's meaning.

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 detects beats in an audio file and drops timeline markers on each beat, specifically for cutting/editing to music. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'premiere_add_marker' (single marker) and 'premiere_detect_beats' (detection only).

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 when aligning cuts to music beats and mentions working on the active or specified sequence. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives, though sibling names offer some context.

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