fire_clip

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears full responsibility. It only states 'Start playing a clip' without disclosing side effects (e.g., if clip already playing, if it loops, or if it blocks). This is minimal behavioral information.

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 short, but includes a 'Parameters:' header and bullet-like structure that is slightly wordy. It could be more concise by combining the parameter descriptions into a single sentence. Overall adequate but not exemplary.

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 output schema and annotations, the description omits important details: return value (e.g., success/failure), prerequisites (e.g., does the clip need to be loaded?), and error conditions. It is incomplete for a tool with two required parameters.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It lists parameters with textual explanations ('The index of the track containing the clip' and 'The index of the clip slot containing the clip'), which adds meaning beyond the schema's type-only fields. However, it does not specify constraints like valid ranges or required relationships.

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 states 'Start playing a clip' which clearly indicates the verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'stop_clip' and 'start_playback' by specifying it targets a clip, but does not explicitly contrast with them.

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 such as 'start_playback' for overall playback or 'stop_clip' to stop a clip. The agent must infer usage from the name and simple description.

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