place_media_on_timeline

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that insert ripples subsequent clips and that the tool verifies the resulting timeline clip (a post-condition), but it never states that overwrite destroys/replaces existing clips on the target track, nor mentions any permission or failure behavior.

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, front-loaded with the action and its target, followed by mode semantics and the verification guarantee. No filler.

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 an 8-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the action, placement coordinates, mode semantics, and verification. It falls short only on prerequisites (active sequence, prior import) and the destructive nature of overwrite.

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 already 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds real semantic value by explaining that insert 'ripples subsequent clips', which the schema's bare enum listing does not convey. It also clarifies that start time is in seconds.

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 (place) and resource (imported project media item onto the active sequence timeline), plus the key locating parameters (start time, track index). It implicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling import_media by specifying the item must already be imported, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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 phrase 'imported project media item' implies import_media is a prerequisite and 'active sequence' implies a sequence must be open, but neither is stated as a condition. The insert/overwrite distinction is described but without guidance on when to prefer one over the other.

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