move_clip

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, yet it discloses almost nothing about behavior: not whether the move is destructive, whether other clips are re-indexed, whether it requires auth or an unlocked timeline, or what it returns. The only real disclosure is the 1-based indexing semantics, which is useful but thin for a mutation tool.

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?

A single tight sentence with the key semantic detail (1-based position) front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though the brevity is partly under-specification rather than pure concision.

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?

For a three-required-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves the clip identity, side effects on surrounding clips, and failure conditions unstated. It is not sufficient to invoke confidently without guessing.

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 0%, so every parameter depends on the description. It adds meaning for to_position ('1-based position') but leaves producer_id and project_name completely unexplained, including which one actually identifies the clip being moved versus the containing project.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Move a clip') plus the target concept ('new 1-based position on the timeline'), which is more than a restatement of the name. However, it never says how the clip is identified (the schema has no clip_id, only an unexplained producer_id) and gives no differentiation from siblings like trim_clip, split_clip, or remove_clip, which also act on clips.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus trim_clip or split_clip, and no prerequisites or exclusions. With several clip-mutating siblings, an agent must infer the boundary between 'move' and 'trim'/'split' entirely on its own.

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