ripple_delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention that ripple delete is destructive, how it affects timeline gaps, whether it acts on all tracks or only targeted ones, or whether it relies on the current selection.

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 extremely short (one sentence) but is under-specified rather than concise. 'Premiere Pro expanded operation' is filler and does not meaningfully aid understanding of the tool's function.

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?

The tool appears to be a destructive timeline operation with ripple effects, yet the description omits crucial context such as scope, selection requirements, track behavior, and relation to undo. Given the tool's complexity and the rich set of sibling editing operations, this description is gravely insufficient.

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 input schema has zero defined parameters but allows arbitrary additionalProperties, creating ambiguity about whether arguments are needed. The description adds no clarification about potential parameters (e.g., track selection, ripple direction). Given the schema's openness, a score of 3 reflects the neutral baseline for no formal parameters, but the description provides no compensating insight.

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 'Premiere Pro expanded operation: ripple delete' essentially restates the tool name and adds the vague phrase 'expanded operation'. It does not explain what ripple delete does (e.g., deleting selected clips and closing gaps), unlike more informative sibling tools.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like lift_selection or extract_selection. It does not state that it operates on selected clips or how it differs from other deletion tools, leaving the agent without context for proper selection.

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