select_clips_in_range

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It does not explain what 'expanded operation' means, what side effects occur, or what is selected. The description is essentially a label with no behavioral detail.

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 extremely short (one sentence), but brevity without substance does not earn credit. It lacks any meaningful information, so it is under-specified rather than concise.

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 the large set of sibling selection tools and the absence of annotations or output schema, a complete description is essential. This description provides almost no useful context, making the tool unusable without external knowledge.

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 defined parameters, so the baseline is 4, but the description fails to explain what 'range' refers to or how it is specified. Since there are no parameters, the description should clarify the implicit inputs, but it does not, forcing the agent to guess.

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 action 'select clips in range' with a verb and resource, but 'range' is ambiguous (time, track, or clip order) and the term 'expanded operation' adds no clarity. It does not differentiate this from sibling selection tools like select_clips_by_name, select_all_clips, or invert_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 on when to use this tool versus alternative selection tools. The description gives no context about its intended use case, making it impossible for an agent to decide between this and other selection options.

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