add_broll

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

Annotations establish the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, closed world), so the bar is lower. The description adds genuine behavioral value beyond that: the storage is an APFS clone with 'no extra disk space' and the clips become visible on the Assets tab, which is context the annotations do not convey.

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 tight sentences: the action and its destination are front-loaded, the APFS parenthetical earns its place by explaining the no-cost behavior, and the final sentence adds the prerequisite without padding.

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 two-param mutation tool with no output schema and annotations already covering safety, the description is nearly complete: it states the destination, the disk behavior, and the visible result. It omits edge cases such as what happens if a clip already exists, but this is a minor gap.

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%, so both parameters (session, files) are already fully documented in the schema. The description's 'use the file from list_broll' merely echoes the schema's files hint and adds no new format or syntax detail, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb ('Put b-roll clips') plus resource and destination ('into a session's broll/ folder'), with the visible effect ('show on its Assets tab next to the takes'). It also names the sibling list_broll as the file source, so an agent can distinguish it without opening schemas.

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?

Clear context and a prerequisite: files should come 'from list_broll', which implies the workflow order. It does not, however, address when to use this versus a similarly named sibling such as save_broll, leaving that distinction to inference.

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