item_smart_reframe

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only states the action 'Apply smart reframe' without disclosing side effects (e.g., permanent modification, reversibility, what the output indicates). This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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, front-loaded with the verb 'Apply'. It is efficient, though its brevity leaves out essential behavioral context.

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?

Despite having 5 parameters and an output schema, the description is extremely brief. It does not explain what smart reframe does, what the result looks like, or any preconditions. This is inadequate for an agent to understand the tool's full behavior.

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 all parameters are already described in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the target being a 'timeline item'. The baseline of 3 is appropriate as the description does not contradict or enhance 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 uses a specific verb 'apply' and identifies the resource as 'smart reframe' on a 'timeline item', which distinguishes it from all sibling item_* tools. However, it does not explain what smart reframe actually does (e.g., target ratio, motion estimation), so it is not fully informative.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like item_set_transform or item_set_crop. The description provides no context about the use case, prerequisites, or when not to use it.

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