unlink_selection

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It fails to state whether the operation is destructive, what gets unlinking, whether it applies to selected clips only, or any side effects. The description offers zero transparency beyond the name.

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?

One sentence that adds no value is not conciseness; it is under-specification. The phrase 'expanded operation' is filler and does not earn its place. The description fails to convey essential meaning in any structured way.

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 simplicity of the tool (no params, no output schema), the description still has an obligation to clarify intent. It is completely inadequate, offering no context about which selections are affected, how to invoke it, or what the outcome is. It is virtually indistinguishable from a placeholder.

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 schema is empty and the schema_description_coverage is trivially 100%. With no parameters to document, the baseline of 4 applies. The description adds nothing, but no parameters means nothing is missing.

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 is a tautology: 'Premiere Pro expanded operation: unlink selection.' It merely restates the tool name without explaining what 'unlink' means in the Premiere Pro context (e.g., breaking audio-video linkage) or how it differs from sibling tools like 'link_selection' or 'link_audio_video'. No specific action or resource is described.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention selection requirements, prerequisites, or scenarios where unlinking is appropriate. With numerous sibling tools for selection and linking, this absence leaves the agent without decision support.

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