set_clip_speed_qe

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

Annotations show readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, indicating it modifies state but is not destructive. The description adds 'more reliable' but doesn't disclose side effects, return values, or prerequisites beyond what annotations offer.

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 concise sentences with the primary action front-loaded. The second sentence adds minor info but is still economical. Could be slightly more efficient, but overall well-structured.

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 parameter count (3, all described) and no output schema, the description lacks context on output or selection criteria among siblings. It is minimally complete but could be more informative.

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%, with all three parameters well-documented. The description only reiterates the 'reverse' parameter, adding no new meaning. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb 'Set' and resource 'clip playback speed', and distinguishes itself by mentioning 'using QE DOM (more reliable than ExtendScript)' and 'Supports reverse', setting it apart from siblings like speed_change and reverse_clip.

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 indicates it's more reliable than ExtendScript, implying a use case, but does not explicitly compare to the sibling speed_change tool or mention when to avoid using it. No exclusions or alternatives are clearly stated.

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