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 of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'advanced speed editing tools' but fails to detail critical aspects like whether this tool modifies clips destructively, requires specific permissions, has rate limits, or what the expected output or side effects are. This is a significant gap for a tool that likely performs mutations.

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 key information without any wasted words. It directly states the tool's purpose and scope, 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 lack of annotations and output schema, and the tool's likely complexity (involving speed editing with multiple action types), the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain behavioral traits, return values, or error conditions, leaving the agent with incomplete context for safe and effective 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the 'action' parameter fully documented via enum descriptions. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 as 'Advanced speed editing tools for creating speed ramps and custom speed segments,' specifying the verb ('editing') and resource ('speed ramps and custom speed segments'). However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'set_playback_speed' or 'retime,' which may have overlapping functionality, preventing a score of 5.

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 such as 'set_playback_speed' or 'retime.' It lacks explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage based on the general purpose alone.

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