razor_all_tracks

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

The description discloses the scope ('across all tracks') and optional time parameter, which is behavior beyond the annotations. The annotations destructioveHint=false are not contradicted, and the description adds context about the operation's effect on the timeline.

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 immediately conveys the action and key parameters. Every word adds value, with no 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?

The description covers the main operation and the time parameter but omits the track_type parameter. Given the tool's simplicity and the schema's coverage, it is mostly complete but could mention track types for full clarity.

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 detailed descriptions for both parameters. The description adds little beyond the schema—it mentions the time parameter but not the track_type. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already provides full parameter meaning.

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's action ('Razor (split)') and target ('all clips across all tracks'), and distinguishes it from siblings like 'split_clip' by specifying scope. It also mentions the optional specific time, which adds clarity.

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 usage for splitting clips across all tracks, with the option to specify a time. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives (e.g., 'split_clip' for single clips), so it lacks explicit exclusion guidance.

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