duplicate_sequence

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does explain the key behavioral nuance: clearContents=true produces an EMPTY copy that inherits frame rate/resolution/track layout, while default false is a full copy. It doesn't mention return values or side effects like activation of the new sequence, but the primary behavioral distinction is disclosed.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. The second sentence earns its place by explaining the critical parameter and providing a rationale for using it, with no wasted words.

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 description, schema, and sibling context are enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. It explains what the tool does, when to use clearContents, and how it differs from create_sequence. It lacks only minor details such as whether the copy appears in the same bin or becomes active, but no output schema is promised.

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 already documents all three parameters. The description adds real value by explaining the clearContents parameter's effect and the practical use case, going beyond the baseline. It doesn't need to elaborate on sequenceId and newName because their schema descriptions are clear.

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?

Description opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Creates a copy of an existing sequence with a new name.' It also distinguishes the tool from create_sequence by noting that create_sequence ignores frame rate, clarifying the niche of clearContents=true.

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 explicitly prescribes when to use clearContents=true: 'the reliable way to auto-create a correctly-specced blank target' and contrasts with create_sequence. This gives concrete usage guidance and names an alternative tool, satisfying the when-to-use dimension.

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