splice

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions adding or amending segments but omits critical behaviors such as idempotency (key parameter), error conditions (e.g., missing sheet or source), or the effect of the 'segment' parameter. The hint about 'why' never reaching pixels is a minor detail but insufficient overall.

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 a single sentence, front-loaded with the key actions. It is concise and avoids excess words, though it could be slightly more structured to separate the two modes (add vs. amend) for clarity.

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 tool's complexity (9 parameters, 6 required, no output schema, no annotations), the description is too brief. It does not explain what a 'cut sheet' is, what happens on success, error handling, or how the output is returned. The agent has insufficient context to use the tool correctly without additional 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema—it loosely maps 'amend' to the 'segment' parameter but does not elaborate on tick semantics or the relationship between parameters. The baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the action ('Add a segment' or 'amend an existing segment's edges') and the resource ('cut sheet'). It is specific and distinguishes the tool's purpose from generic operations, though it could benefit from clarifying what a 'cut sheet' is in the context of the sibling tools.

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 splice versus other tools like 'carve', 'stock', or 'sound'. There is no mention of prerequisites, alternatives, or contexts where this tool is appropriate or inappropriate.

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