ripple_delete

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true. The description adds that it closes the gap (ripple effect) and mentions using QE DOM. This provides some behavioral context beyond the annotation, but does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., undo behavior, impact on markers).

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose and a technical detail. It is front-loaded with the main action. While very concise, it sacrifices no necessary information.

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 tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema. The description adequately covers the basic behavior, but lacks details on error handling (e.g., invalid node_id) or edge cases (e.g., deleting the only clip). For a destructive operation, slightly more context would be beneficial.

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 fully describes the 'node_id' parameter with a clear description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. With 100% schema coverage, a score of 3 is appropriate per baseline.

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 action ('ripple delete'), the object ('a clip'), and the effect ('removes clip and closes the gap'). It uses a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from general delete or remove tools. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'remove_selected_clips'.

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. The description lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., clip must be on a track) or when not to use it. Given many sibling editing tools, explicit usage advice would be helpful.

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