capcut_set_color_adjustments

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states the operation type. It does not say whether unspecified sliders are left unchanged or reset, whether the segment must already support color adjustments, or what side effects or prerequisites exist. This is a meaningful gap for a mutating tool.

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, efficient sentence with the action and target front-loaded. It contains no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail.

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 fairly simple setter with a well-documented schema, the core call is mostly inferable. However, the description omits important context such as the role of `draft`, behavior when an adjustment parameter is omitted, and prerequisites about the segment type. This leaves some gaps, but it is not severely incomplete.

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 80%, and most parameters (segmentId, brightness, contrast, saturation) already have descriptions. The description adds the context that these are manual slider adjustments, but it does not compensate for the undocumented `draft` parameter or clarify parameter interactions. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('Set') and resource ('manual slider color adjustments ... on a segment'), and enumerates the three adjustments (brightness, contrast, saturation). It clearly communicates what the tool does, though it does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling tools like capcut_set_props or capcut_apply_filter.

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 intended use case is reasonably implied: apply direct slider-based color adjustments to a segment. However, the description gives no explicit guidance on when to use this instead of filters, effects, or other color-related tools, nor does it mention whether it complements or replaces existing adjustments.

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