Final Cut Pro MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'selected clips' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether this is a destructive operation, what happens to the original clips, if it requires specific permissions, or what the output looks like. For a creation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 has 0 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally complete for a simple creation tool. However, with no annotations and sibling tools like 'create_compound_clip', it lacks context on differences, permissions, or output behavior, leaving gaps for an AI agent.

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 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so the schema fully documents the lack of parameters. The description adds value by implying that the tool operates on 'selected clips' (contextual input), which isn't in the schema. This compensates adequately, though it could specify how clips are selected.

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 ('create') and the resource ('multicam clip'), specifying it's made 'from the selected clips'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_compound_clip' or 'create_storyline' by focusing on multicam functionality. However, it doesn't explicitly define what a multicam clip is, leaving some ambiguity.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create_compound_clip' or 'merge_clips', nor does it mention prerequisites such as having clips selected. It only states what the tool does, not when it's appropriate.

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