clear_sequence_in_out

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

Annotations already indicate non-read-only and non-destructive. The description adds that it clears points, which is consistent. However, it does not disclose side effects, prerequisites (e.g., requiring an active sequence), or behavior when both parameters are false (defaults are true).

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 with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 two boolean parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core functionality. It lacks mention of prerequisites like needing an active sequence, but this is implied by the name and common use.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for each boolean parameter. The tool description does not add meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for this dimension.

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 (clear) and resource (in/out points on active sequence). It distinguishes from siblings like clear_item_in_out which operates on clips, and set_sequence_in_out_points which sets points.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as clear_item_in_out or set_sequence_in_out_points. The context is implicit from sibling names, but no direct recommendation or exclusion is given.

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