get_total_clip_count

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

The description implies a read-only operation via 'Get', but with no annotations, it does not explicitly state that the tool is non-destructive or whether it may fail without an active sequence. Adequate but not explicit.

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?

Single sentence with no redundancy. Efficient but could be considered too minimal; a brief note about return type would improve clarity without violating conciseness.

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 zero-parameter tool, the description covers the core purpose but omits details like return value type (integer) and behavior when no sequence is active. With no output schema, some additional context is warranted.

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 input schema has zero parameters and 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning since there are no parameters to clarify. Baseline 3 applies per rubric.

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 (Get), the resource (total number of clips), and the context (across all tracks in the active sequence). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_timeline_summary which provides broader sequence info.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_sequence_structure or get_timeline_summary. It does not indicate when a simple count is preferable or mention any prerequisites.

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