set_clip_fade_out

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 states that the tool sets the fade-out region but does not mention whether it overwrites existing fades, whether it can be undone, any error conditions, or the need for the clip to be a valid audio clip. The description reveals the core action but omits side effects or limitations.

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 well-structured: a one-sentence summary followed by a clear parameter list. Every sentence contributes necessary information, and the format is easy to scan. It is appropriately front-loaded with the main action without redundant filler.

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?

The description covers the basic action and all parameter meanings, which is adequate for a simple setter. However, it lacks context about error handling, overwrite semantics, or prerequisites. Given the absence of annotations and output schema, this leaves some gaps, but it is a minimum viable description for the tool's simplicity.

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 description compensates fully for the 0% schema coverage by explicitly listing and explaining all four parameters: track_index, clip_index, start, and end. It defines start and end as fade-out start/end positions in beats, and identifies the index parameters as track and clip slot indices. This adds complete meaning beyond the schema's bare types.

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 function: 'Set an audio clip's fade-out region, in beats.' It uses a specific verb ('set') and resource ('audio clip's fade-out region'), and the unit (beats) is specified. This distinguishes it from siblings like set_clip_fade_in and set_clip_start_marker.

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. It does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or contrast with related tools such as set_clip_fade_in. The only context is the action itself, which is implied but not explicitly differentiated from similar clip-editing operations.

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