import_mogrt_from_library

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=false already indicates this is a write operation, and the description confirms it with 'Import'. However, no additional behavioral context is added, such as what happens if the MOGRT doesn't exist, whether it creates a clip on the timeline or in a bin, or any side effects. The description adds minimal value beyond the 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?

The description is a single, clear sentence that conveys the core functionality without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action and key details.

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 absence of an output schema and the presence of multiple parameters, the description is too brief. It does not explain the outcome of the import (e.g., where the MOGRT appears, if it is placed on a timeline), potential failure modes, or dependencies like library accessibility. This limits its usefulness for an autonomous agent.

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 all parameters described. The description only adds that the import is 'by name', which aligns with the 'mogrt_name' parameter. It does not provide additional meaning for 'track_index' or 'start_seconds' beyond what the schema already states. Baseline score of 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 states exactly what the tool does: 'Import a MOGRT from an Adobe Library by name'. It identifies the specific verb (import), resource (MOGRT), source (Adobe Library), and method (by name). This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling 'import_mogrt' tool which likely imports from a file path.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'import_mogrt' or other import tools. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., library being open) or when not to use it.

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