set_clip_warp_mode

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention side effects, reversibility, required permissions, or error conditions. It merely states the action, similar to the 'update_drive' example that scored 2. The valid parameter values add some value, but that belongs to parameter semantics.

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 concise, front-loaded with the purpose, and uses a clear parameter list. Every sentence is informative and there is no fluff. It is well-structured for an agent to parse.

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 simplicity (3 required parameters, no output schema), the description is nearly complete: it explains all parameters and valid values. The only missing context is that a clip must exist and perhaps that warp mode is typically set after warping, but these are minor for this tool. It is adequate for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 0%, and the description compensates by providing a parameter list with meanings for all three parameters. It clarifies track_index and clip_index, and lists valid warp_mode values (beats, tones, texture, repitch, complex, complex_pro). This goes beyond the schema's bare field names, though it could be more explicit about indexing (e.g., 0-based).

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 'Set the warp mode of an audio clip' with a specific verb and resource. It also lists the valid warp mode values, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_clip_warp_info. This is an unambiguous purpose.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites are mentioned (e.g., clip must be an audio clip, warp mode must be enabled), and no exclusions are stated. The description only states what it does, not when to use it.

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