crop_clip

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It mentions cropping to loop boundaries but does not disclose whether the operation is destructive, whether it modifies the clip in place, if it is reversible, or any side effects. The term 'crop' implies trimming but this is not explicitly stated.

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 a single sentence plus an essential Args list. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and does not waste words. The Args section is slightly redundant with the schema but adds the zero-based detail, so it 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 tool with two integer parameters and no output schema requirement, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not clarify what 'loop boundaries' means in context, whether the clip is in the session or arrangement view, or any prerequisites. More context would help the agent select and invoke it correctly among many clip operations.

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%, so the description's Args section adds critical meaning by specifying that track_index and clip_index are zero-based, and that clip_index refers to a clip slot. This is essential for correct usage and goes beyond the bare property names.

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 uses a specific verb 'crop' with a clear resource 'clip' and a scope 'to its loop boundaries'. While it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like set_clip_loop, the action of cropping is distinct enough for an agent to understand its purpose.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any situational context. The description only states what the tool does, not when to prefer it over related clip operations.

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