select_all_items

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, and it delivers none. It does not say whether this replaces or extends the current selection, what scope 'all' covers, whether it is undoable, or what happens to previously selected tracks. For a state-mutating selection tool this is a serious gap.

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 no waste and the operation front-loaded. It is efficient, though its brevity is also the source of the missing scope detail rather than a model of well-structured specification.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description should compensate, but it omits the one thing an agent needs: the scope of 'all' (entire project vs. active track/context) and the effect on the existing selection. Given the dense sibling set of selection tools, this leaves too much to inference.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to document; the baseline for a parameterless tool is 4. The description correctly implies no arguments are needed.

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 clear verb ('Select all') and resource ('media items'), so the basic operation is understandable. However, it gives no scope qualification and does not distinguish itself from closely related siblings such as select_all_tracks, unselect_all_items, or get_selected_items. It is adequate but leaves the agent guessing what 'all' spans.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like select_all_tracks or set_time_selection, and no mention of prerequisites or selection-state conditions. Usage is only implied by the name and one-line description.

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