arrangement_clear

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds two things annotations cannot: the operation is undoable, and clips are matched by start position rather than overlap — a meaningful distinction for a destructive range operation. It does not say whether clips spanning the boundary are preserved or what the response contains.

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 sentence carrying action, selection rule, scope and defaults, followed by a one-word reversibility marker. Nothing is padded and the destructive defaults are front-loaded.

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 3-parameter destructive tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, this covers action, matching semantics, defaults and undo. It stops just short of telling the agent how many clips were removed or how to identify them afterwards.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns above that by supplying the per-call defaults in one place — no track means all tracks, no start means 0, no end means the end of the arrangement. That said, it does not address the schema's warning that index-based track ids shift when tracks move.

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 ('Remove') plus resource ('timeline clips'), with the precise selection rule ('starting inside a range') and scope ('on one track or all'). The 'starting inside' qualifier also implicitly sets it apart from range-overlap or single-clip removal siblings such as arrangement_remove_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 '(default: all)' note signals that calling with no arguments wipes the whole arrangement, which is useful context for the caller. But there is no explicit guidance on when to pick this over arrangement_remove_clip, clips_clear, or edit_undo, leaving the agent to infer the choice from names alone.

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