delete_clip

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full load. It does disclose the key behavioral consequence – whether downstream timing shifts (ripple=True closes the gap) – which is genuinely useful for a destructive edit. It omits reversibility/undo availability, permission needs, and what happens if the ref is invalid.

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?

Two tight sentences with zero filler, leading with the action and identifier format before the optional parameter's effect. Every clause carries information the schema does not.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the definition covers the essential mechanics: identifier format and timing consequences. Missing are error behavior on a bad ref and whether the deletion is undoable, but the core calling information is present.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it largely does: it documents the ref string format including the FCPXML dotted form, and explains what ripple=True/False actually does to the timeline. The only gap is that it doesn't repeat the default value (true) already present in the schema.

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 and resource ("Delete a clip") plus the identifier form accepted ("3" or connected "3.0"), so the action is unambiguous. It does not distinguish itself from adjacent edit tools like trim_clip or move_clip, but the verb is specific enough to select correctly.

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 versus alternatives such as trim_clip, move_clip, or remove_effects, nor any stated preconditions (e.g. clip must exist in the open timeline). The ripple explanation helps choose a parameter value but not the tool itself.

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