create_subclip

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states the primary action ('creates a subclip') but does not disclose whether the source item is modified, whether permissions are required, what happens on failure, or whether the subclip is selected or returned. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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, clear sentence with no filler. It effectively communicates the core action without unnecessary detail.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (7 parameters, 4 required), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is too terse. It does not explain the effect of optional parameters like takeAudio/takeVideo/hasHardBoundaries, nor does it differentiate from similar tools like create_subsequence.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all seven parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; it merely references in/out points, which map to startTime/endTime already documented in the schema.

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 ('creates') and resource ('subclip from a project item') and clearly states the key input ('specified in/out points'). It is distinct from sibling tools like set_item_in_out or create_subsequence, which have different purposes.

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 implies usage: use this when you need to create a subclip from a project item using in/out points. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, even though siblings like set_item_in_out and create_subsequence exist.

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