relink-footage

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the operation doesn't affect composition usage, which is a key behavioral trait. It also mentions the selection ambiguity resolution (itemName must match exactly one item). However, it doesn't mention potential side effects like file path validation or whether the operation is reversible.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. It uses two sentences effectively: the first explains what the tool does, the second explains how to select the item. No wasted 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 tool's moderate complexity (3 params, no output schema), the description is fairly complete. It explains the core behavior, selection methods, and the non-destructive nature regarding compositions. It could mention what happens if the new path is invalid, but that's a minor gap.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds context about itemId being preferred and unambiguous, and itemName requiring exact match, which reinforces the schema. However, it doesn't add much beyond what the schema already states.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: relink a footage item's source to a different file on disk, with the key detail that it doesn't affect composition usage. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like import-footage by focusing on relinking existing footage rather than importing new.

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 provides clear guidance on when to use this tool (to change a footage item's source file) and how to select the item (by itemId preferred, or itemName with exact match). It doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, but the context is clear enough.

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