get_selection

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. 'Get' transparently signals a non-mutating read and the scope is clear, but the description says nothing about behavior when the selection is empty (empty list vs. error), whether an active sequence/panel is required, or whether it alters focus.

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 clause with no filler or redundancy. It is well-sized for a simple getter, though it is so terse that it leaves behavioral questions unaddressed rather than being a model of informative density.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and no parameters, the description is the only source of context available, yet it omits the return shape (list of clip references vs. ids) and the no-selection behavior. It is minimally sufficient for an agent to attempt the call but not to interpret the result confidently.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate beyond the scope it already states. Baseline 4 applies to parameterless tools.

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 concrete verb and resource ('Get all currently selected clips') with a scope qualifier ('currently selected') that distinguishes it from bulk readers like get_timeline_clips. It does not explicitly name or contrast with those siblings, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

The word 'currently selected' implies the usage context (you call it after something like select_clips), but there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no exclusion of alternatives such as get_timeline_clips or get_clip_info, and no note that it depends on an active sequence.

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