set_clip_enabled

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly identifies the mutation (enable/disable) and the non-destructive guarantee, but it does not disclose side effects, idempotency, permissions, or response behavior. The output schema may document return values, but side effects remain implicit.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to purpose or differentiation, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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?

For a simple two-parameter toggle with an output schema, the description covers the core operation and non-destructive intent. However, with no annotations and no usage guidance or behavioral details, an agent has to infer edge cases and side effects. It is minimally adequate but not fully complete.

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. It maps both parameters: 'one timeline item' corresponds to item_id and 'enable or disable' corresponds to the enabled boolean. This adds semantic meaning beyond the bare schema titles, though it lacks detail about value semantics or format.

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 a specific verb pair ('enable or disable') and a clear resource ('one timeline item'). The qualifier 'without deleting it' distinguishes it from destructive sibling tools like delete_clips. This is unambiguous and immediately actionable.

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 phrase 'without deleting it' provides clear context that this tool toggles an item's enabled state while preserving it, rather than removing it. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives, but the intended use case is clear and the exclusion of deletion is stated.

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