select_clips_by_name

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

Annotations are sparse (no readOnly/destructive hints). The description describes core behavior but does not disclose default selection behavior (replace vs. add) beyond the add_to_selection parameter. It does not mention side effects or limitations (e.g., no matching clips). Additional context could improve 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?

Two sentences with minimal waste. Front-loaded with the core action and criteria. Efficient and to the point.

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 full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers the selection purpose and optional filters. It could mention default selection behavior (replace vs. add) and behavior when no clips match, but overall adequate.

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%, so each parameter already has a description. The tool description adds that name uses 'case-insensitive substring match' which is duplicated from schema. It does not add significant meaning beyond the schema, justifying baseline 3.

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 (select), resource (clips in active sequence), and criteria (name substring match). It distinguishes from siblings like select_clips_by_color and select_all_clips by specifying name-based filtering.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (to select clips by name with optional filters). It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the sibling tools cover other selection methods, so usage context is implied.

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