Auto Reframe Sequence

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

Annotations declare non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent, but the description adds real behavior the annotations cannot: it creates a NEW sequence, Premiere derives dimensions from source height, the tool then forces the requested frame size and verifies it, and the Auto Reframe effect refits afterward. This is useful operational context beyond the flags.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and its output shape, with no filler. The second sentence is dense but every clause carries information about the tool's internal behavior.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need no explanation, and the description covers the creation semantics, the dimension quirk, and verification. It omits any mention of when to prefer this over simpler resize tools, which would round it out.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds genuine semantics for target_width/target_height by explaining Premiere's derived-sizing behavior (1080p at 9:16 yields 607x1080) before the requested size is applied.

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 ('Auto-reframe a sequence into a new sequence of target_width x target_height'), and the phrase 'into a new sequence' distinguishes it from resolution-mutating siblings like set_sequence_resolution or set_scale_to_frame_size.

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?

Usage is only implied: no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or named alternative is given. An agent can infer this is for reframing (e.g., to vertical) but must decide on its own versus set_sequence_resolution or set_scale_to_frame_size.

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