get_clip_property

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

The description discloses the 'empty property = all' behavior, which is useful. However, it does not mention error handling (e.g., clip not found), read-only nature (though implied), or return format. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but only partially addresses it.

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 that is concise and front-loaded, containing no filler words. Every word is essential and directly conveys the tool's purpose.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description should explain return values. It only says 'Get ... property', leaving uncertainty about the return format (e.g., single value vs. dictionary). This is incomplete 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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that 'name' is a clip name and explains the 'property' parameter's empty-string behavior. This adds value, but it omits details like the expected format of the property value.

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 clearly states the tool's action (get), resource (media pool clip's property), and the key behavior of returning all properties when the property parameter is empty. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_item_property.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what it does, without indicating prerequisites, when-not-to-use, or comparisons to siblings like get_timeline_items or list_media.

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