scene_edit_detection

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

The description lacks behavioral details beyond the action. It does not disclose that the tool likely modifies the timeline (e.g., splitting clips at detected cuts) and may be destructive. Annotations are all false, so the description carries the full burden but fails to provide sufficient transparency.

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 with no fluff or redundant information. It efficiently communicates the tool's purpose.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal but functional. However, it does not explain the outcome or side effects (e.g., timeline modification). Given the potential for destructive changes, more completeness 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?

There are no parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter semantics. The baseline score is 4, and the description provides adequate context for the tool's operation.

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 ('Perform scene edit detection') on a specific resource ('selected clips in the active sequence'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like split_clip or auto_reframe_sequence by focusing on automatic detection rather than manual splitting or reframing.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., clips must be selected) or scenarios where it should be avoided.

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