delete_clip

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently states the destructive nature ('Delete') and the no-op behavior on empty slots. It also scopes the operation to Session view, but does not cover reversibility or error handling for invalid indices. Adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the bare action.

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?

Two short sentences: 'Delete a clip from a Session-view clip slot. No-op if the slot is empty.' Every word earns its place, with the action and key edge case stated upfront. No fluff or redundancy.

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 simplicity of the tool (2 integer params, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the core operation, the scope (Session view), and an important edge case (empty slot). It does not detail return values or error conditions, but these are less critical for a simple mutation. Overall sufficient but not exhaustive.

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 lack of parameter documentation. Unfortunately, the description does not mention track_index or clip_index beyond the implicit reference to a 'clip slot'. It does not explain which index corresponds to what or how they are used, leaving the agent to infer from the property names alone.

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 (delete), the resource (clip), and the scope (Session-view clip slot). It distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_track and delete_device by specifying the exact target. The phrase 'No-op if the slot is empty' further clarifies behavior, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 implies usage for deleting clips from Session view slots, which indirectly differentiates from tools like clear_arrangement_clips or delete_track. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide any exclusions. The context is clear but not elaborated.

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