list_sequences

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation by using 'Lists', which suggests non-destructive behavior, but doesn't explicitly state this or cover other behavioral aspects like permissions needed, rate limits, or error conditions. The description adds some context about what data is returned (IDs, names, basic properties), which is useful beyond just the action.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action ('Lists all sequences') and specifies the context ('in the current Premise Pro project') and output details ('with their IDs, names, and basic properties'). Every word adds value with no redundancy or fluff.

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 (0 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is adequate but has gaps. It explains what the tool does and what data it returns, but doesn't cover behavioral aspects like whether it requires a project to be open, error handling, or format of the returned data. For a read-only list tool, this is minimally viable but could be more complete.

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 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (though empty). The description doesn't need to explain parameters, so it meets the baseline of 4 for zero-parameter tools. No additional parameter semantics are required or provided.

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 verb 'Lists' and the resource 'sequences in the current Premiere Pro project', specifying the scope as 'all sequences' and the returned data as 'IDs, names, and basic properties'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_project_items' by focusing specifically on sequences, but doesn't explicitly contrast with other sequence-related tools like 'get_project_info'.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention when to choose this over 'list_project_items' (which might list broader project items) or 'get_project_info' (which might include sequence information), nor does it specify prerequisites like needing an open project.

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