preview_edit_plan

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

The description claims the tool does not change Premiere, which implies read-only behavior. However, the annotation readOnlyHint is false, meaning the tool may modify state. This is a direct contradiction, reducing reliability. The description does add useful context about return token, but the contradiction is severe.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose and behavior. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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 tool has one parameter, no output schema, and the description explains the return token and prerequisite relation to apply_edit_plan, it fully covers what an agent needs to know to use it correctly.

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 schema already describes the plan object well (100% coverage). The description adds the constraint 'maximum 100' operations, which provides extra value beyond the schema. No further parameter details are needed.

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 validates and previews a compound timeline edit without modification, and that it returns a confirmation token required by apply_edit_plan. The verb 'Validate and preview' with the resource 'compound timeline edit' is specific and distinct from siblings like apply_edit_plan.

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?

It explicitly says 'without changing Premiere' indicating a dry-run use case, and that the token is required by apply_edit_plan, suggesting a precursor step. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, but the context is clear.

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