duplicate_clip

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

The description explains the duplication behavior (same position, next track), but lacks details on side effects such as whether effects, keyframes, or attributes are copied. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden.

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 extremely concise: one sentence with a clarifying parenthetical. Every word adds value, and no extraneous information is present.

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 parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior. It could mention whether the duplication includes effects or if there are prerequisites (e.g., empty track), but the current level is sufficient.

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 only parameter node_id is fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The tool description reuses that context without adding new meaning beyond the schema.

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 duplicates a clip on the timeline, specifying the exact behavior: copying to the same position on the next available track. It distinguishes from sibling tools like duplicate_sequence.

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?

While the description conveys the core function, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., duplicate_sequence or other clip operations). No when-not-to-use or prerequisite information is given.

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