move_clip_to_track

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden, but it merely restates the operation without disclosing side effects, how the target track is chosen, or what happens when moving a clip. It adds no behavioral context beyond the tool name.

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 sentence, which is concise, but 'expanded operation' is vague filler and no additional structure or clarification is provided. It is not bloated, yet is under-specified.

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 tool has no annotations, no output schema, and an empty input schema, so the description is the only source of context. It fails to explain how the clip or track is identified, whether it operates on the current selection, or how it relates to siblings like 'move_clip'.

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 context indicates zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage, so there are no parameter semantics to document. The description doesn't mislead, and the baseline for 0-param tools is 4.

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 states the primary action ('move clip to track') with a clear verb and resource, making it understandable. However, 'expanded operation' is vague and there is no distinction from similar sibling tools like 'move_clip' or 'add_to_timeline'.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any preconditions or exclusions. The description does not mention selection requirements, target track specification, or context.

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