Final Cut Pro MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool changes speed/retiming, implying a mutation, but lacks details on permissions, reversibility, or effects on the clip (e.g., whether it modifies the original or creates a new version). This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 that front-loads the core purpose ('Change the speed/retiming of the selected clip') with zero wasted words, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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's moderate complexity (mutation with one parameter) and no annotations or output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but lacks behavioral context, usage guidelines, and output details, leaving gaps that could hinder effective agent use.

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 100%, with the 'action' parameter fully documented via an enum list in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying the action applies to a clip, so it meets the baseline of 3 where the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Change the speed/retiming') and resource ('selected clip'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'rate_clip', 'set_playback_speed', or 'show_retime_editor', which appear related to similar functionality.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., requiring a clip to be selected), exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools like 'rate_clip' or 'set_playback_speed', leaving usage context ambiguous.

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