get_clip_volume

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Get' implies a read-only operation with no side effects, but the description does not state permissions, error behavior for invalid clip/track indices, or whether the returned gain is linear or in dB. For a simple getter this is adequate but shallow.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action and the target directly.

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 getter with complete schema coverage, the description is sufficient to invoke the tool correctly. It could be improved by noting whether the returned gain is a number, its units, or the dependency on an active sequence, but those are relatively minor gaps for this complexity level.

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 (trackIndex and clipIndex) are already documented. The description adds no further meaning about index scoping or value format beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('current audio volume (gain) of a clip'), making the operation unambiguous. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling set_clip_volume, but the get/set pairing is inferred from the names.

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 such as get_clip_info or get_clip_speed, nor any stated prerequisites like requiring an active sequence or valid clip. The purpose implies a read-before-write workflow, but the description does not say so.

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