get_sequence_structure

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds usage context but no further behavioral traits (e.g., performance, pagination). It does not contradict annotations.

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?

Two sentences deliver all necessary information concisely: first defines the output, second provides usage guidance. No redundant content.

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 complex tool with no output schema, the description gives a solid high-level summary of returned data. It could detail what 'clip metadata' includes, but is sufficient for an AI to understand the tool's scope.

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 sole parameter sequence_id is described in the schema as 'Sequence name or ID. Uses active sequence if omitted.' The tool description mirrors this, adding no new meaning. With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3.

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 explicitly states it returns a 'complete structural overview' including all tracks, clips with positions, gaps, and metadata, clearly distinguishing it from more specific sibling tools like list_sequence_tracks or get_clip_at_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 advises using it 'before making edits' to understand timeline state, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or list alternative tools, which would strengthen this dimension.

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