clip_get_properties

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

No annotations are present, so the description must establish behavior on its own. 'Get' plus the property list makes clear this is a read-only query of clip attributes, not a mutation. It does not discuss edge cases or error conditions, but for a simple getter the core behavioral profile is transparent.

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?

One concise sentence front-loads the operation and follows with a colon-delimited list of returned properties. There is no filler and every word earns its place.

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 low-complexity getter, the description plus the output schema and self-explanatory parameter names cover the essential call contract. It lists exactly which properties are returned, and the output schema can handle structural details; the main remaining gap is explicit alternative guidance.

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% and the description adds no meaning for the two required parameters, track_id and clip_index, which are the only way an agent identifies which clip to inspect. The description does not even mention them, so it fails to compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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?

Description names a specific operation ('Get') on a specific resource ('timeline clip') and enumerates the exact properties returned: in/out, duration, speed, opacity, reverse. This clearly differentiates it from sibling mutators like clip_set_speed, clip_reverse, and clip_set_opacity.

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 retrieval of clip properties, and the sibling list contains matching setters, so an agent can infer when to call it. However, it never explicitly says when to prefer this over related tools such as bin_get_clip_details or track_get_info, nor provides exclusions.

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