Import Edl

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

The description says no import is attempted, which implies a safe no-op, but annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, meaning the tool may modify state. That is a direct contradiction about whether the tool has side effects.

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 tightly written sentences, front-loaded with the unavailability reason and followed by the concrete alternative. Every sentence earns its place.

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, the description needn't explain return values. It gives the agent enough context to avoid the tool and use import_fcp_xml instead, which is complete for a disabled import stub.

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% and the single file_path parameter is documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 (CMX 3600 EDL import) and immediately distinguishes itself from the usable path by naming import_fcp_xml. An agent can tell this is a disabled import tool without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly says the tool is unavailable by design and gives the exact alternative workflow: convert the EDL to FCP7 XML and call import_fcp_xml. This covers when not to use it and what to do instead.

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