Set Sequence Resolution

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is partly covered. The description adds only a parenthetical defining frame size and omits meaningful behavior: whether resizing resamples clips, whether it can be undone, and whether it requires the sequence to be active. Minimal added value beyond the structured fields.

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 wasted words. It is tight, though at the cost of the behavioral detail a mutation tool would benefit from.

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 annotations carry part of the safety profile. The tool is simple (2 params, no nesting), but for a sequence-wide mutating operation the description still leaves unaddressed prerequisites and side effects, making it merely adequate.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents width and height as pixel dimensions. The description's '(frame size)' phrasing adds a small interpretive gloss but no units beyond pixels, no valid-range or aspect-ratio coupling guidance, so the baseline 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 (Change) and resource (resolution/frame size) scoped to the active sequence, which is enough to distinguish it from sibling setters like set_sequence_frame_rate or set_sequence_pixel_aspect_ratio. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with those siblings, so it is clear but not maximally differentiating.

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 guidance on when to use this versus alternatives such as set_sequence_frame_rate, set_sequence_pixel_aspect_ratio, or set_scale_to_frame_size, nor any prerequisite or state condition (e.g., sequence must be open/active). The agent gets a purpose but no routing context.

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