clip_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return structure (id, kind, name, start, length, plus per-clip details) and implies non-mutating behavior by saying 'List'. It doesn't explicitly state side effects, but for a list operation, that's sufficient.

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 that front-loads the action, then provides essential return details. No unnecessary words or repetition; it's efficient and well-structured.

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?

For a simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does and what it returns. An agent can call it correctly without needing additional context.

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 schema already provides a full description for track_id, including optional behavior and default action. The tool description adds no new information beyond what the schema states, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without enhancing it.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and resource 'clips' with clear scope ('on a track (or all tracks)') and enumerates return fields. It distinguishes itself from sibling mutation tools like clip_set, clip_remove, and clip_duplicate, which perform different actions on clips.

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 purpose is clear as a read-only enumeration, and no explicit alternative is needed since it's the only clip-listing tool among siblings. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use it vs. other clip tools or mention exclusions, so it's not a full 5.

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