set_clip_start_marker

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral effects. It only states the intended action without revealing side effects, error handling, undo behavior, or what happens with invalid indices. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the purpose.

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 extremely concise: one sentence establishing purpose and a compact parameter list with minimal explanations. No redundant or filler sentences; every element carries meaning.

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 setter with three parameters, the description covers the essential facts, but lacks any context about valid ranges, relationship to end marker, or failure modes. Given no output schema or annotations, a bit more context (e.g., 'must be before end marker') would improve completeness, but it is minimally viable.

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 is the only source of parameter meaning. It explains all three parameters: track_index, clip_index, and position (start marker position in beats). This fully compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

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: 'Set a clip's start marker, in beats.' It identifies the specific resource (clip start marker) and the unit, distinguishing it from the sibling set_clip_end_marker. The verb and object are precise.

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 on when to use this vs alternatives such as set_clip_end_marker or set_clip_loop. No prerequisites, constraints (e.g., position must be less than end marker), or context for valid usage. The description implies usage but does not state it explicitly.

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