get_sequence_count

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

Without annotations, the description carries the entire burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention any side effects, return format, error conditions, or performance characteristics. It only repeats the tool's name, providing zero transparency.

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 short but not genuinely concise—it contains filler ('Premiere Pro expanded operation') and simply restates the tool name. It does not pack meaningful information into its small space, making it under-specified rather than well-structured.

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 simplicity, this description is insufficient. It does not clarify what count is returned (e.g., number of sequences in the project), whether an open project is required, or how the result is presented. The agent is left with no helpful context beyond the name.

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 description is not required to explain parameter semantics. The baseline of 4 is appropriate because there are no parameter details to add.

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 restates the tool name ('get sequence count') without adding any specific detail. It is a tautology—the description adds no new information beyond the name itself.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions, so the agent gets no help in deciding when to invoke it.

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