create_sequence_from_clips

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

Annotations indicate this is a mutation (readOnlyHint=false) but not destructive (destructiveHint=false). The description adds the key behavior of automatic ordering, but does not explain if original items are altered, what happens to existing sequence bins, or error cases. With annotations present, the bar is lower, and the description provides minimal but non-contradictory context.

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, clear sentence with no redundant words. It efficiently conveys the core purpose, though slightly more detail about the outcome could improve utility without bloating.

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 simplicity of the tool (2 required params, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is adequate but lacks information about return value, default behavior if items are missing, or interaction with the current workspace. A complete description for this low-complexity tool would address the return type or side effects.

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 both parameters described. The description adds 'automatically placing project items in order', which reinforces the schema's 'to include in order' but does not provide new details about parameter semantics, formatting, or constraints. Baseline 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 tool creates a sequence from project items, using a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('sequence from clips'). It distinguishes from other sequence-creation tools (e.g., create_sequence, create_sequence_from_preset, create_subsequence) by specifying 'automatically placing project items in order'.

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 this tool versus alternatives like create_sequence or create_subsequence. It lacks context on prerequisites (e.g., whether items must already be in the project) and no exclusion criteria.

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