get_next_edit_point

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely restates the tool name and provides no additional detail about what 'get next edit point' does—whether it returns a time, moves the playhead, or has side effects. This is essentially a tautology and gives the agent no behavioral insight.

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 very short but includes filler like 'Premiere Pro expanded operation,' which adds no value and is redundant given the API context. It is under-specified rather than concisely complete, so it fails the standard of every sentence earning its place.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what the tool returns or accomplishes. It only says 'get next edit point,' which is ambiguous—does it return a timecode? Move the playhead? Select the edit? Without this context, the description is incomplete for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The empty schema fully covers the parameter situation, and the description doesn't need to add anything. No parameter documentation deficit exists.

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 tool's function: 'get next edit point' is a specific verb+resource. However, it does not distinguish this from sibling tools like move_playhead_to_edit or get_clip_at_playhead, so it misses the differentiation required for a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description simply states what it does without any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess when this tool is appropriate.

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