get_clip_links

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

There are no annotations; the description infers read-only behavior (get) but doesn't disclose any more behavior: side effects, permissions, return value format, or why it exists. Verifies nothing. It neither contradicts annotations (none).

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?

Very concise, one sentence, no wordiness. It does not explicitly say how to get links, but the text is compact and front-loaded.

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?

There is no output schema, no annotation, no mention of what the links point to, no prerequisites. Sibling tools supply context. There are many sibling tools, but little description.

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 0 parameters; the schema has 100% coverage. Hence the description doesn't need to fill parameter information. Baseline 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 'Premiere Pro expanded operation: get clip links' largely restates the tool name. It identifies a resource (clip links) and verb (get) but doesn't say what clip links are, what format, or when this should be used. Sibling tools are not mentioned.

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 usage guidance is provided: no when-to-use, no alternatives, no exclusions. The phrase 'expanded operation' vaguely suggests capability but gives no actionable context.

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