get_clip_transform

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it only implies a non-destructive read via 'Get the current'. It does not say what happens with an invalid trackIndex/clipIndex, whether it reads live timeline state versus cached data, or what the returned transform properties look like.

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 short sentence with no filler, front-loading the verb and the resource. Nothing is wasted.

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 two-parameter read tool this is minimally sufficient, but with no output schema and no annotations the description should at least indicate what 'motion/transform properties' comprise (position, scale, rotation, anchor point). As written, the agent knows what to call but not what comes back.

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%, so both parameters (clipIndex, trackIndex) are already documented, and the description adds only the confirmation that the track is a video track. Baseline 3 applies since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Get') and a specific resource ('current motion/transform properties of a video clip'), which is clearly distinct from set_clip_transform and from adjacent readers like get_clip_speed or get_clip_effects. It stops short of explicitly naming those siblings, but the resource is unambiguous.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative. The word 'current' weakly implies reading state before a set_clip_transform call, but the agent must infer that from the sibling list rather than from the description.

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