select_clip_in_detail

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the primary behavior (select and show in Detail View) but does not mention side effects like changing the selected track, error handling, or whether the view is opened automatically. It adds some context beyond the name but lacks depth.

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: two short sentences plus parameter definitions. Every word earns its place, and the parameter explanations are clear and direct.

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 simple selection tool, the description provides the core operation and parameter semantics. It does not explain return values, but the presence of an output schema (though not shown) reduces that need. Minor omissions like edge cases or prerequisites are acceptable given the tool's simplicity.

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 field names and types with no descriptions. The description adds critical meaning by defining each parameter as a zero-based index for track and clip slot, which is essential for correct invocation. This 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 states a specific action ('Select a clip') and its effect ('show it in the Detail View'), making the purpose clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, but the 'Detail View' detail adds enough specificity to distinguish it from other clip operations.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., the clip must exist) or when to prefer another selection tool, leaving the agent without decision support.

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