sequencer.report

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

Annotations are absent, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states 'Report', implying a read operation, but does not confirm lack of side effects, output format, or any permissions needed. No contradictions exist due to missing 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 extremely concise (5 words, one sentence) and front-loaded with the action verb. Every word earns its place, providing the essential purpose without unnecessary fluff.

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 simple read tool with no parameters or output schema, the description states what it does but lacks details like what information is returned (e.g., names, properties) and whether it is read-only. Adequate but leaves the agent guessing about output shape.

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 has zero parameters with 100% coverage, so the schema provides no meaning beyond emptiness. The description implies no filters exist (reports all strips), adding slight context. A baseline of 4 is appropriate as no parameter info is needed.

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 reports sequence strips in the active scene, using the verb 'report' and resource 'sequence strips'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like sequencer.strip_add (add) and sequencer.strip_remove (remove) by focusing on retrieval. However, it doesn't specify what 'report' means (e.g., list or summarize), leaving some ambiguity.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the name and context imply it's for listing strips, there is no explicit mention of use cases, prerequisites, or when to prefer other sequencer tools like sequencer.strip_set or sequencer.modifiers.

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