set_motion_position

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the tool verifies the readback value and supports two coordinate modes, but omits permissions, reversibility, required clip-targeting context, and failure behavior for a mutation operation.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource. The coordinate examples are compact and useful, with no wasted text.

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 core operation and coordinate modes, and the schema covers most parameters. It still leaves clip-targeting prerequisites implicit and does not explain what the readback verification returns, so it is adequate but not fully complete.

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 88%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds concrete examples (960,540 for a 1920x1080 sequence; 0.5,0.5 for center) that reinforce coordinate_mode, but this is largely redundant with the schema's own parameter descriptions.

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 'Set' and resource 'Motion Position (X,Y) of a video clip on the timeline', clearly differentiating it from sibling motion tools like set_motion_scale and set_motion_rotation. The coordinate-mode support is also stated up front.

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 when-to-use guidance versus alternatives such as move_clip or set_motion_scale; usage is implied by the purpose. It explains coordinate modes but does not state prerequisites or when to choose this tool over other timeline motion tools.

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