remove_effect_by_name

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'remove effect by name.' It does not explain whether the name must be exact, whether it affects selected clips or the whole sequence, what happens if multiple effects share the name, or any destructive side effects beyond removal.

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 very short, but 'Premiere Pro expanded operation' is unnecessary boilerplate that adds no operational value. The meaningful content—'remove effect by name'—is concise, but the filler prevents a higher score.

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?

This is a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, so the description should provide more context about scope, matching rules, and side effects. It does not, and the presence of sibling tools like remove_effect and remove_all_effects makes the lack of differentiation a significant gap.

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 input schema declares zero formal parameters, so the baseline is 4, but the description's 'by name' implies an undocumented parameter for the effect name. The agent cannot determine how to specify that name (e.g., property key, value format), so the description only partially compensates for the schema's silence.

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 effect by name,' which distinguishes it from broad siblings like remove_all_effects and generic remove_effect. However, 'Premiere Pro expanded operation' is vague filler, and the target clip/sequence context is unstated.

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 prefer this tool over remove_effect or remove_all_effects, nor any prerequisites such as having a clip selected or an active sequence. The description only says what it does, not when to use it.

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