get_sequence_settings

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

The phrase 'Gets the settings' implies a safe read operation, and the parenthetical examples hint at what the response contains. However, with no annotations, the description fails to disclose whether all settings are returned or only explicitly set ones, and it offers no error or edge-case context. It is not misleading, but it adds only minimal behavioral insight.

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 short sentence with no filler; every word contributes value. The parenthetical examples are helpful and do not inflate the length.

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?

This is nearly complete for a one-parameter getter with a fully documented schema. However, the vague 'etc.' and lack of specification about whether settings are defaults or only explicitly set values leave some ambiguity, especially given the existence of overlapping siblings like get_sequence_structure.

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 fully documents sequenceId ('The ID of the sequence') and schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds nothing beyond what the schema already conveys, but it also doesn't need to, given the parameter is self-explanatory.

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 uses a specific verb ('Gets') and identifies the resource ('settings for a sequence') with clear examples ('resolution, framerate'), which makes the tool's purpose obvious. However, it does not explicitly contrast with similar getters like get_sequence_structure or get_full_sequence_info, so it doesn't earn a 5.

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 when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives are provided. An agent cannot easily distinguish this tool from siblings such as get_sequence_structure or get_sequence_in_out_points based on the description alone; it only restates the operation without adding contextual direction.

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