Add marker

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It states the add operation but omits potential side effects, requirements (active sequence), or behavior when timeSeconds is out of range. It does not contradict any annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the core action and optional parameters. No redundant or unnecessary words.

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 no output schema or annotations, the description should provide more context about the result (e.g., whether a marker object is returned), constraints (timeSeconds must be within sequence duration), and default behavior for 'sequenceId'. It leaves significant gaps for an agent to infer 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 description adds meaning for 'type' by listing its enum values and clarifies that 'name' and 'comment' are optional. However, it does not explain 'sequenceId' (defaults to active sequence) and schema coverage is only 40%, so the description only partially compensates.

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 action 'Add a timeline marker' and specifies the resource and scope: 'to a sequence at a given time (seconds)'. It differentiates from sibling tools like 'premiere_add_beat_markers' and 'premiere_list_markers'.

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 vs. alternatives (e.g., 'premiere_add_beat_markers'), or prerequisites such as needing an active sequence. The description lacks context for proper tool selection.

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