reverse_clip

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

With no annotations provided, the description must convey behavioral traits. It mentions 'Uses QE DOM' but does not explain side effects (e.g., whether it toggles or sets direction), error handling, or requirements (e.g., clip selection state). This is insufficient for an agent to predict tool behavior.

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?

Two sentences with zero wasted words. The action and supporting detail ('Uses QE DOM') are front-loaded and concise.

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 no output schema and a moderately complex context with many sibling tools, the description lacks completeness. It provides no information about return values, error states, or prerequisites (e.g., clip must be on timeline). This leaves the agent without sufficient context for reliable use.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds 'reverse direction' context to the boolean parameter, but the schema already explains 'True to reverse, false for normal'. The description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond the schema.

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 'Reverse' and the resource 'a clip's playback direction', making the tool's function unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like set_clip_speed or speed_change by specifically targeting playback direction reversal.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as speed_change or set_clip_speed. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as whether the clip must be on a timeline or if it supports audio clips, leaving the agent without context for appropriate invocation.

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