list_markers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the tool 'list all markers' without detailing what information is returned, ordering, pagination, or scope limitations. This is insufficient for a tool with no output schema.

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, concise sentence that conveys the essential purpose without any superfluous words. It is appropriately front-loaded.

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 no annotations, output schema, or nested parameters, the description provides a basic understanding. However, it could be more complete by specifying the return format or any behavioral nuances given the number of sibling tools.

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 node_id is well-documented in the schema with a description. The description adds context by specifying the two use cases but does not add meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 lists markers either on the active sequence or a specific clip, using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from siblings like add_marker, delete_marker, get_clip_markers, and get_sequence_markers_by_type.

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 two usage modes (active sequence vs. clip) via the node_id parameter but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over related ones like get_clip_markers or get_sequence_markers_by_type. No guidance on 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.