ripple_delete

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

There are no annotations, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention that this is a destructive operation, that it works on selected clips, or that it closes gaps. The phrase 'expanded operation' reveals nothing about side effects, prerequisites, or reversibility.

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 short but under-specified. It contains only filler ('Premiere Pro expanded operation') that adds no meaningful information, and the rest simply repeats the tool name. It does not earn its place because it fails to convey any actual operational detail.

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 zero annotations, no output schema, and a sparse description, the tool is completely underdescribed. It fails to explain what ripple delete does, how it interacts with the current selection, or what the expected result is. This is a serious gap for a destructive editing operation.

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 zero parameters, so the description does not need to elaborate on parameter semantics. The schema is permissive but context confirms no required parameters. A score of 4 reflects the baseline for no-parameter tools, though the description could still note that no arguments are needed.

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 'Premiere Pro expanded operation: ripple delete' is essentially a tautology that restates the tool name without explaining what the operation does or what resource it acts on. It does not specify that it deletes selected clips and closes the gap, nor does it distinguish from sibling tools like lift_selection or extract_selection.

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 ripple_delete versus alternatives. With many closely related sibling tools (remove_selected_clips, lift_selection, extract_selection), the absence of any usage context makes it impossible to know when this tool is appropriate.

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