get_clip_properties

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, which adequately convey that this is a safe read operation. The description adds 'detailed properties', but does not disclose any behavioral specifics beyond what annotations offer (e.g., no mention of performance, error states, or data scope).

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 that is concise and front-loaded. Every word is necessary and there is no superfluous information.

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?

The tool has one parameter and no output schema. The description hints at 'detailed properties' but does not elaborate on what those properties are or how they relate to sibling retrieval tools. Given the simplicity, it is minimally adequate but leaves the agent to infer the return structure.

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% and the parameter 'node_id' is already well-described in the input schema. The description simply reiterates 'by its node ID', adding no new semantic meaning.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed properties of a specific clip by its node ID'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like 'set_clip_properties' (write counterpart) and 'get_clip_at_position' (which returns a clip at a position).

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 implies usage when you need clip properties by node ID, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over similar tools such as 'get_item_info' or 'get_clip_speed'. No alternatives or exclusions are provided.

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