get_warp_markers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior, but it only restates the operation implied by the name. It does not mention side effects (none expected), permissions, return format, or behavior when no markers exist.

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 concise and front-loaded with the action, followed by a clear parameter list. Every sentence is necessary with no fluff or repetition.

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?

As a simple getter with two parameters, the description provides the core function and parameter meanings. However, since there is no output schema and no mention of the return value structure, the agent lacks complete context about what 'all warp markers' entails.

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 0% description coverage, so the description compensates by defining both parameters: 'track_index' and 'clip_index'. However, the definitions are minimal and do not explain indexing conventions or that the clip is an audio clip.

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 'Get all warp markers from an audio clip' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like add_warp_marker and delete_warp_marker by indicating a retrieval operation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_clip_warp_info or set_clip_start_marker. The description provides no exclusions or preferred use cases.

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