Toggle Track Visibility

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnly=false, destructive=false), and the description adds genuinely useful context beyond them: the operation maps onto Premiere's mute state and reads the state back, so the agent understands it is a real mutation of track mute. Minor tension with idempotentHint=false since setting a boolean 'visible' reads as idempotent, but the tool name 'toggle' is consistent with that annotation.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the mechanism explanation. No padding; the second sentence earns its place by explaining the mute-state indirection.

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 the safety profile. For a 2-parameter mutation tool the definition is largely sufficient, with the only real omission being guidance versus the mute_track sibling.

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 description coverage is 100% and both parameters ('visible' boolean, 'track_index' 0-based) are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond that, so 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 and resource ('Set video track visibility') and clarifies the underlying mechanism (track mute state / eye icon). It is distinguishable from generic track tools, though it never addresses the closely related 'mute_track' sibling, leaving the agent to infer the difference.

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 explains how visibility is implemented but gives no when-to-use guidance or exclusions. With a 'mute_track' sibling in the list, the absence of any routing between the two is a clear gap.

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