unnest_sequence

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

The description clearly states the behavioral effect ('replacing it with the contents'), which goes beyond annotations. Annotations already indicate non-destructive mutation, and the description adds context about what happens to the timeline. No contradictions.

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 of 14 words, front-loading the action and effect without any wasted words or redundant 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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential information: action, resource, and result. It could mention error cases (e.g., invalid node_id) or confirm that the operation modifies the timeline, but given the low complexity, it is sufficiently complete.

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 description coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'node_id', so the description does not need to add parameter details. The tool description does not mention parameters, which is acceptable given full schema coverage. 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 ('Unnest') and resource ('nested sequence on the timeline'), clearly stating the action and its effect ('replacing it with the contents'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'nest_clips' and 'create_subsequence' by implying the opposite operation.

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 implies usage when a nested sequence should be expanded, but it does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives or prerequisites like ensuring the sequence is active or the clip is nested.

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