insert_clip

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the ripple effect, which is useful. However, it omits details about preconditions (e.g., active sequence, existence of the item), error handling, or side effects on the timeline.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core purpose and behavior. No unnecessary words.

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?

Given the complexity (5 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It does not explain the return value (e.g., success/failure indicator), what happens on invalid input, or prerequisites like an active sequence.

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 60% (3 of 5 parameters have descriptions in schema). The tool description adds no extra meaning for the undocumented parameters 'trackIndex' and 'sequenceName' (no descriptions in schema or description). It does not clarify valid values or behavior beyond what the schema provides.

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 'Insert' and clearly identifies the resource ('project item onto a track at a given time') and the key behavioral effect ('rippling later clips forward'). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'append_clip' or 'overwrite_clip'.

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 implies the tool is for inserting with ripple effect, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'append_clip' or 'overwrite_clip'. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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