set_clip_position

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 correctly conveys that this is a write operation ('Set') and that values are in pixels. However, it omits important traits such as whether the operation is destructive, requires specific permissions, or has side effects on existing keyframes. The impression of mutation is clear, but the description could be more transparent about prerequisites and outcomes.

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, well-structured sentence of 12 words. It front-loads the action and target, and includes essential details (units) without any filler. Every word earns its place, making it highly efficient for an AI agent to parse.

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 the tool's simplicity (3 parameters, no output schema), the description is adequate but not fully complete. It does not mention the need for a Motion effect on the clip, nor does it explain how this position interacts with other transform properties like anchor or scale. It also provides no information about return values or error conditions. While sufficient for domain experts, an AI agent might miss important context for correct invocation.

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 already has 100% coverage (each parameter has a description: node_id, x in pixels, y in pixels). The description only adds the unit declaration 'Values are in pixels', which is redundant with the schema. No additional meaning about parameter relationships, valid ranges, or context is provided. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description adds marginal value 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 explicitly states the action ('Set the Position property') and the target ('on a video clip's Motion effect'). The verb 'Set' with the specific resource 'Position property on a video clip's Motion effect' provides a clear and distinct purpose. It differentiates itself from sibling tools like set_clip_anchor_point or set_clip_scale by naming the exact property and effect.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as the clip needing to have a Motion effect applied. No comparison to similar tools like set_clip_anchor_point or set_clip_rotation is given. The agent receives no context to decide between this and other set_clip_* tools.

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