tracking-clips

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states a read-only operation by using 'List', and the qualifier 'loaded' adds context that only currently loaded clips are included. However, it does not disclose any potential side effects, performance implications, or state requirements beyond the obvious. It is adequate but minimal.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise for a simple list operation and contains all essential information without redundancy.

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 the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is fully adequate. It clearly states what is listed and that it concerns loaded clips. No additional context is required for an agent to select or invoke this tool correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 per the rubric. The description adds no parameter specifics, but none are needed since the schema is empty and coverage is 100% (trivially). The description's reference to 'loaded' implicitly scopes the operation, adding slight semantic value.

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 'List loaded movie clips' uses a specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('loaded movie clips'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like tracking-clip_load (which loads clips) and tracking-report (a broader report). The purpose is unambiguous and immediately actionable.

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 implies usage (if you want to see loaded clips, use this tool) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives such as tracking-report or tracking-clip_load. No exclusions or context are given, so it relies on the name and domain to infer appropriate use.

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