add_transition

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only states the basic action and gives an example, but does not disclose behavior such as whether clips are modified, what happens if clips are not adjacent, whether existing transitions are replaced, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and key information. No wasted words; it earns its place as a concise summary.

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 tool is a timeline mutation with no output schema and no annotations. The description is too minimal to cover important contextual details like adjacency validation, error cases, or interaction with existing transitions. It is adequate for a simple case but not complete for reliable agent invocation.

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 provides descriptions for all 4 parameters (100% coverage), so the description adds minimal value. The example 'cross dissolve' for transitionName is helpful but does not meaningfully extend the schema explanations. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (adds a transition) and the target resource (between two adjacent clips on the timeline). It is specific and distinguishes from generic 'add' tools, though it does not explicitly differentiate from the similar sibling 'add_transition_to_clip'.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_transition_to_clip or batch_add_transitions. It implies the requirement of adjacent clips but does not state prerequisites, when not to use, or fallback options.

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