Generate and save shot list

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds real value: it names what is destroyed ('overwrites the prior shot list'), states the return ('returns the generated rows'), and clarifies the computation model ('does not run a model'), which tells the agent results are deterministic/heuristic. It stops short of covering reversibility or permission requirements, keeping it out of the top band.

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?

Three tightly packed sentences: the core action first, the routing guidance second, the destructive/return caveats last. No filler, and the highest-risk fact (overwrite) is prominent rather than buried.

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 single-parameter destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers the action, the side effect, the return shape, the deterministic nature, and the alternative routes. Nothing essential to correct invocation is missing.

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?

With one parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already explains that script_id is a script-version ID sourced from list_scripts, generate_script, or revise_script. The description adds no further format or sourcing detail, so the baseline of 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?

States a specific verb pair and resource: 'Derive and save a default shot list from a script's beats and its workspace format.' It also distinguishes itself from sibling read (get_script) and custom-generation (generate_script with shot_list) paths, so an agent can identify it without opening a schema.

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?

Explicitly names when to use it ('when you want heuristic camera cues') and two alternatives with the conditions that select them: get_script to read the existing shot list without replacing it, or a custom shot_list via generate_script. Both the when and the when-not are covered.

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