Beat-cut short video (auto)

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

With only 'openWorldHint: true' in annotations, the description adds substantial behavioral context: it detects beats, builds shots that switch exactly on the beat, places trimmed segments on V1, lays music on A1, and optionally renders. No contradictions with 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 concise with four sentences, each adding essential information. It is front-loaded with the purpose and follows with key behavioral details, leaving no waste.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description covers the tool's inputs, process, and outputs (shots on V1, music on A1, optional rendering). It is complete enough for an AI agent to understand the overall functionality and expected results.

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 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds value by explaining 'every beatsPerCut beats' and the conforming behavior related to the 'aspect' parameter, going beyond the schema's basic parameter descriptions.

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 automatically cuts footage clips to the beat of a music track, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'premiere_detect_beats' and 'premiere_add_beat_markers' which only detect or add markers without performing the edit.

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 advises to provide a footage folder or explicit clip paths along with a music file, giving clear context on inputs. It also notes conforming to 1080p or 9:16, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus alternatives.

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