move_clip

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says a clip moves to a new time position; it does not disclose whether the old position is cleared, whether overlaps are allowed, what happens on invalid input, or any other side effects. This is too thin for a mutating tool.

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 short, front-loads the purpose, and then adds a compact argument list. The Args section partly duplicates schema property names, but it adds useful semantic context, so it is justified.

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 essential behavior and all three required parameters are described, and an output schema exists. However, with no annotations, the definition omits behavior around invalid positions, overlapping clips, track constraints, and error handling, leaving some ambiguity for an agent.

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 0%, but the description gives meaningful semantics for all three parameters: track index identifies the track, old_pos_bars is the current start, and new_pos_bars is the destination. It also specifies the unit (bars), which the bare schema does not.

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?

States a specific verb ('Move'), a specific resource ('clip'), and the clip types covered (pattern/bbtco/sampleclip), plus the new time position. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like place_* or delete_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 operation name and description imply it should be used when repositioning an existing clip rather than placing or deleting one. However, there is no explicit comparison to siblings like place_pattern, place_bb_clip, or place_sample_clip, and no mention of prerequisites or invalid states.

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