clip_set_name

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

With no annotations, the description fully covers behavior: idempotency, read-after-write verification, return of changed flag, and before/after names. No contradictions or missing safety info.

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?

Three short sentences deliver purpose, usage guideline, and behavioral info with zero waste. Front-loaded with the core action, then supporting details.

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?

Covers prerequisite, idempotency, return fields (before/after names, changed flag). Missing explicit mention of return structure or edge cases, but sufficient for typical use. No output schema, so description carries the burden, and it does so well.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining how track and slot indices locate the clip and that 'name' is the new name. Given 0% schema coverage, this compensates well, but could specify constraints like allowed characters or length.

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 clearly states the verb 'rename' and the resource 'session clip' with indexing method, distinguishing it from sibling tools like clip_set_envelope or clip_set_loop.

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 advises 'Use after confirming the target clip exists' as a prerequisite, and mentions idempotency behavior. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or provide direct alternatives.

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