auto_transition

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the core behavior: a timed transition of the background layer from Preview to Program using the current effect. However, it omits mutation-side details such as required permissions, whether the operation is interruptible/cancelable, timing/duration behavior, and what state results on the bus.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the parenthetical adds real clarifying value about the Preview-to-Program semantics rather than restating the name.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema action with no annotations, the description covers the observable effect but leaves out operational context an agent needs to invoke it correctly — notably the precondition of a set Preview source and configured transition effect, plus how it relates to cut_transition and set_transition_effect.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a 0-parameter tool applies. The description appropriately focuses on behavior rather than nonexistent inputs.

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?

States a specific verb ('Perform an Auto transition') and resource ('main switcher background layer'), and clarifies the domain meaning by explaining that it takes Preview to Program using the current effect. It is understandable without opening any schema, though it never names the sibling cut_transition or switch_program to explicitly differentiate the 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 explains what an Auto transition is but gives no guidance on when to choose it over cut_transition, switch_program, or set_transition_effect, and states no prerequisites (e.g. that a Preview source must be set, or that a transition effect must be configured first). Usage must be inferred entirely from the tool name.

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