list_sequence_tracks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool lists tracks but does not disclose whether it is read-only, what properties are included, how clips are nested, or whether locked/hidden tracks are covered. The return format is also unspecified without an output schema.

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?

Single sentence that is front-loaded with the action 'Lists all video and audio tracks' and contains no filler or redundant information.

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 one-parameter read tool, the description gives a reasonable summary of return content (tracks with properties and clips). However, without an output schema or details on track property names, nesting, or error conditions, it is only minimally complete for an agent planning to invoke the tool and interpret results.

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% for the single parameter sequenceId, matching the 'specific sequence' mention in the description. No additional meaning is added beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 uses specific verb 'Lists' and resource 'all video and audio tracks in a specific sequence with their properties and clips'. This clearly identifies the tool's function and differentiates from siblings like get_track_info or list_sequences.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_track_info, get_sequence_structure, or get_full_sequence_info. The only implied context is that it requires a specific sequenceId, but no exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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