remove_all_effects

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses no behavioral traits: no mention of what 'all effects' applies to, whether it's destructive, if a selection is required, or if the operation is undoable. 'Premiere Pro expanded operation' is vague and uninformative.

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 and quite short, but the prefix 'Premiere Pro expanded operation' adds no value and wastes words. It is concise but incomplete, omitting essential scope context. The core message is clear but could be more efficient.

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 tool with no parameters, the description still needs to specify what 'all effects' applies to. It doesn't indicate whether it operates on selected clips, all clips in the timeline, or a specific item, nor does it mention prerequisites like having a selection. Given the many sibling tools, this lack of context makes the description inadequate.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the schema is an empty object. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed given the absence of parameters.

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 a clear action: remove all effects. It is specific about the scope ('all' vs individual effects), but it doesn't specify the target (e.g., selected clip, all clips) and doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like remove_effect and remove_effect_by_name beyond the 'all' qualifier.

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 given on when to use this tool vs alternatives, what prerequisites exist (e.g., selection), or exclusions. The description only provides a bare action statement without any contextual usage hints.

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