fire_clip

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It only states the action and arg meanings, but does not mention whether launching a clip stops other clips, respects launch quantization, or what happens if the clip is already playing. No side effects or error conditions are disclosed.

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 extremely concise—one sentence for the action and a simple arg list with terse definitions. No wasted words, action is front-loaded, and the structure is easy to scan.

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?

The essential action and parameters are covered, and an output schema exists. However, it lacks usage guidance and behavioral transparency, making it only minimally complete for a simple tool. Given the lack of annotations, more context about side effects or selection criteria would improve completeness.

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 provides only bare titles ('Track Index', 'Clip Index') with no descriptions. The description adds critical context: both are zero-based indices, and clip_index refers to a clip slot. This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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 'Start playing a clip' with explicit parameters for track and clip indices. This specific verb+resource ('start playing' + 'clip') distinguishes it from siblings like stop_clip, fire_scene, and start_playback.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as fire_scene or start_playback. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or context about session vs. arrangement. Usage is only implied by the function name.

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