arrangement_remove_clip

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds the non-obvious side effect that later clips on the track shift down one index, plus that the operation is undoable. That reindexing warning is exactly the kind of consequence an agent cannot infer from annotations.

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 parenthetical-loaded sentence with zero filler; the destructive action, the index source, the reindex consequence, and undoability are all 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 two-parameter destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers safety, side effects, and recovery, which is what an agent needs before calling. Return value is not described, though 'Undoable' covers the main post-call concern.

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 100%, and both schema fields already explain the clip index source (arrangement.get) and the track id/index distinction. The description merely echoes the index provenance, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb and resource ('Delete one timeline clip') with an explicit scope qualifier ('one') that separates it from bulk siblings like arrangement_clear and clips_clear. The delete target and index source are stated in the same breath.

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?

'Delete one timeline clip' plus the pointer to arrangement.get implies this is the single-clip removal path rather than the bulk clear tools, and 'Undoable' tells the agent recovery is available. It stops short of naming alternatives or stating prerequisites explicitly.

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