get-layer-clip-frames

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation via 'Get', but does not explain error behavior (e.g., layer not found), return format, or whether the tool relies on a selected layer when layerName/layerIndex are omitted.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It conveys the tool's purpose and output data efficiently.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, and the description does not clarify critical context like layer selection resolution (layerName vs layerIndex), whether compIndex is sufficient alone, or what happens if the layer is missing. This leaves important gaps for an agent trying to invoke the tool correctly.

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%, so the schema already explains all three parameters. The description adds no extra parameter-level detail, staying at the baseline 3 for schema-complete cases.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and clearly names the resource ('a layer's clip start/end frames, source frame range, and duration in frames'). It unambiguously states what the tool returns and is distinct from sibling tools, none of which focus on retrieving layer timing data.

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 usage is implied by the purpose (use when you need clip frame information), but there is no explicit guidance on when to use layerName vs layerIndex, or whether one is required beyond compIndex. No alternatives are mentioned, though no sibling tool directly competes.

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