Create scene

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the created scene is empty, but says nothing about permissions, whether the operation is idempotent or reversible, whether it returns an id, or how it fails for an invalid project_id.

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 short sentence with the resource front-loaded and zero filler. It is appropriately sized, though the terse phrasing leaves room for a routing clause at no real cost.

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?

For a one-parameter creation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the minimum: what is created and where. It omits the return value (no output schema to defer to) and any dependency or follow-up context, so it is adequate but thin.

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?

Only one parameter exists and the schema already documents it at 100% coverage, including its provenance from flow_list_projects. The description adds no parameter detail, which is acceptable at this coverage level but earns no bonus.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Create an empty scene (timeline) in a project.' The parenthetical clarifies that a scene is a timeline, and the 'empty' qualifier separates it from sibling flow_add_clips_to_scene. It does not explicitly name siblings, but an agent can still tell it apart from flow_create_project and flow_create_character.

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 prerequisites (e.g. does the project need to exist first?), and no mention of the natural follow-up sibling flow_add_clips_to_scene. Usage is only weakly implied by the word 'empty'.

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