set_arrangement_clip_name

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 states the action without detailing side effects, reversibility, error conditions, or any state requirements. The mention of clip_index ordering is parameter semantics, not behavior.

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 and well-structured, front-loading the action and following with a clear parameter list. Every sentence earns its place, with no fluff or redundancy.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema details, the description is incomplete. It omits error handling, validation rules, and what happens if indices are invalid. The lack of behavioral context makes it insufficient for safe invocation.

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 description adds significant meaning beyond the schema, which has no descriptions. It explains that clip_index is ordered by start_time as returned by get_arrangement_clips, and clarifies user_prompt is for telemetry. This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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 tool sets the name of a clip in the Arrangement timeline, using a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from the sibling set_clip_name by specifying the location, which is essential for selecting the correct tool.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like set_clip_name. It does not mention any prerequisites, conditions, or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer from the Arrangement timeline mention.

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