add_to_timeline

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It mentions the 'linkAudio' parameter's behavior (removes auto-linked audio) and the insertMode options, which adds transparency. However, it does not disclose potential side effects like overwriting existing clips, shifting content, or whether the operation is reversible. The description is not contradictory to any annotations (none exist).

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 a single sentence that is clear and front-loaded with the core action. It does not waste words, but it could benefit from a brief note on when to use it (e.g., 'Use for single clip insertion; for batch operations, see add_to_timeline_batch'). Overall, it is concise and structured well.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (8 parameters, 4 required) and no output schema, the description is adequate but not complete. It explains the main purpose and key parameters but lacks guidance on error conditions, return values, or interaction with other tools. The description covers the essentials but leaves room for more detail on edge cases like invalid track indices or time conflicts.

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 the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds value by explaining the 'linkAudio' parameter's purpose (removing silent PCM audio) and the 'sourceInPoint'/'sourceOutPoint' semantics (replicating Source monitor marks). This goes beyond the schema's basic descriptions, providing practical context for parameter usage.

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 clearly states the action: 'Adds a media clip from the project panel to a sequence timeline at a specific track and time.' It specifies the resource (media clip), the destination (sequence timeline), and the placement parameters (track and time). This distinguishes it from siblings like add_to_timeline_batch, remove_from_timeline, and move_clip.

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 description implies usage for placing clips on a timeline but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_to_timeline_batch or insert_from_source. It lacks guidance on prerequisites (e.g., sequence must exist, project item must be valid) or when to prefer other insertion methods.

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