Select Disabled Clips

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false, so the agent knows selection state changes, but the description adds nothing beyond that — notably it does not say whether this replaces the current selection, adds to it, or operates only within the active sequence's targeted tracks. For a selection tool where replace-vs-add semantics matter, that is a real gap.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler, appropriately sized for a no-parameter tool. It is efficient but so thin that conciseness shades into under-specification.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the zero-parameter schema keeps the call signature trivial. What is missing is the selection semantic (replace vs. additive) and the interaction with existing selection state, which the agent cannot recover from annotations alone.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to clarify beyond the target set, which it does state.

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 gives a specific verb ('Select') and resource ('disabled clips') with a scope qualifier ('in the active sequence'), which cleanly distinguishes it from select_all_clips, select_clips_by_color, select_clips_by_name, and select_clips_in_range. It stops short of naming those siblings explicitly, but the 'disabled' filter is a strong discriminator.

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 when-to-use guidance, no mention of the natural follow-up (enable_disable_clip / batch_enable_disable) on the selected set, and no stated preconditions such as requiring an active sequence. The agent must infer the workflow entirely.

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