toggle_track_visibility

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosure. It explains the toggle action and emphasizes 'output' vs 'targeting', which adds behavioral clarity beyond the schema. However, it does not mention potential side effects or reversibility, though the operation is simple and likely reversible.

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 concise, two sentences, each adding value. It front-loads the purpose and then adds a key differentiator. There is no redundancy or fluff.

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 toggle tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It covers what, when, and how it differs from related operations. No missing critical information.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add substantial meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema already explains (e.g., visible, sequenceId, trackIndex). It provides minimal extra context, but the schema descriptions are sufficient.

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 tool's purpose: shows or hides a video track by toggling its output (eye icon). It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from set_target_track by explicitly noting this is output, not targeting.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool (toggle output visibility) and when not to (targeting), directing to set_target_track for V1/A1 patch buttons. It also clarifies that the sequence need not be active, providing clear context for usage.

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