duplicate_clip

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

With no annotations, the description should carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the core action but does not describe side effects like whether the duplicate is selected, its exact placement beyond what the offset parameter implies, or any return value. The schema partially compensates by explaining the offset behavior, but the description itself adds little contextual depth.

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 concise sentence that directly conveys the purpose. No unnecessary words or 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?

For a simple 2-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimally viable but does not fully elaborate on the duplicate's placement, selection state, or return value. The offset parameter's schema description covers some context, but overall completeness is adequate yet leaves gaps.

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 100%, with clear descriptions for both parameters (clipId and offset). The description adds no parameter information beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 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 uses a specific verb 'Duplicates' with a clear resource 'a clip on the timeline', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like duplicate_sequence. It unambiguously states the action and target.

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 when to use the tool (when duplicating a clip), but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use it. It lacks guidance relative to other clip operations, though the distinct name helps.

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