Get sequence tracks & clips

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces 'Read-only' and adds useful behavioral details like included fields (names, times) and the optimization option for includeClips. No contradictions.

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 concise sentences with no wasted words. The main purpose is front-loaded, and the parameter guidance is efficiently integrated.

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 that this is a simple read-only query with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers the return content (tracks with clip details) and usage tips. It could be slightly more explicit about track structure but is generally complete.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3. The description adds semantic value by explaining the effect of setting includeClips to false (‘lighter summary’) and implying default behavior for sequenceId (active sequence), which goes beyond the schema 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 it returns video and audio tracks of a sequence, with specific details like per-clip names and timing. It distinguishes from siblings like premiere_get_active_sequence or premiere_list_sequences by focusing on track and clip specifics.

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 provides clear context for using the tool: it is read-only and can be used to get track data. It also gives a tip for a lighter summary via the includeClips parameter, but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or list alternative tools for related tasks.

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