capcut_set_props

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It indicates that properties are set, but doesn't say whether values replace or merge with existing ones, how invalid values are handled, whether keyframes are affected, or what side effects occur on the segment or draft.

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 one front-loaded sentence with no filler, naming the action and affected properties directly. It's efficient, though it is so brief that it shifts important clarity responsibilities to other dimensions.

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 12 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too sparse to give an agent a complete picture. It omits how draft and segmentId are used, what valid ranges look like, and what the tool returns or changes in the draft state.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the 12 parameters. It loosely groups them into 'transform / opacity / volume / speed / visibility,' but provides no units, ranges, coordinate system details, or notes on parameter interactions. The parameter names are fairly self-explanatory, but the description adds minimal semantic depth.

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 uses a specific verb ('Set') with a clear resource ('a segment') and enumerates the property categories it modifies. This separates it from segment-add/delete tools, though it doesn't explicitly distinguish it from overlapping siblings like capcut_move_segment or capcut_set_speed_curve.

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. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or conditions stated, so an agent must infer usage solely from the property list, which is insufficient for choosing among many similar segment-editing tools.

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