resolve_get_clip_transform

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. 'Read' correctly signals a non-mutating operation, and the 1-based indexing rule plus playhead fallback adds important behavioral context beyond the bare tool name. It omits error/edge-case behavior, but the output schema likely covers returns.

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 that states the operation, the resource, and the selection modes with no filler. Every clause adds useful information.

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 read-only getter with only two optional parameters and an output schema available, the description is sufficient for correct invocation. It covers the selection mechanism and indexing convention; return-value details are delegated to the output schema, as appropriate.

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 does by explaining that the two integer parameters are 1-based track/clip indices and that omitting them refers to the playhead. This gives meaningful semantics to the otherwise bare parameter names and default values.

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 uses a specific verb ('Read') and a clear resource ('clip transform values'), and it specifies the two selection modes: playhead or explicit 1-based video track/clip indices. This cleanly distinguishes it from siblings like resolve_set_clip_transform and resolve_get_clip_properties.

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 clearly conveys when the tool applies: reading transform values, either at the playhead or by providing explicit track/clip indices. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the invocation context is unambiguous.

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