remove_all_effects

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the removal action and internal API usage, but does not disclose side effects, required permissions, behavior for empty clips, or reversibility.

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 extremely concise at 8 words, front-loading the key action. Every sentence contributes, though there is room to add more behavioral detail without becoming verbose.

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 modification tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It explains what the tool does and its main parameter, but lacks information on edge cases, error handling, or prerequisites.

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 100% coverage with a clear description for 'node_id' as 'Node ID of the clip'. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so a 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 clearly states the verb 'Remove' and the resource 'ALL effects from a clip'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'remove_effect' (single effect) and 'remove_effect_by_name' (by name) by explicitly specifying the scope 'ALL'.

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 that this tool should be used when all effects need to be removed, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. The technical note 'Uses QE DOM' does not provide usage context.

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