Propose cut

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it saves an immutable timeline version and never renders. This clarifies side effects and boundaries beyond the annotations.

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 concise, front-loading the core action in the first sentence, then clarifying a critical behavioral note, and ending with an illustrative example. Every sentence serves a purpose. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points for constraints) but effective as is.

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?

The description covers key behavioral aspects and constraints. However, it lacks information about prerequisites (e.g., footage must be scanned) and the return value (e.g., a timeline ID for later retrieval via skycut_get_timeline). These gaps reduce completeness for an agent.

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 100%, so all parameters are described in the schema. The description adds overall context (e.g., narrative arc, shot constraints) but does not enhance parameter-level meaning beyond the schema's descriptions. The example shows typical values, which is helpful.

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 assembles a timeline from the footage graph with specific narrative and technical constraints (narrative arc, 3-8s shots, crossfades, ±5% duration). It distinguishes itself from siblings like skycut_render_final (rendering) and skycut_apply_timeline_edit (applying edits) by explicitly stating it never renders.

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 provides clear usage context: use when an AI director should create a timeline for review. It explicitly states what the tool does NOT do (rendering). The example gives a concrete scenario. However, it does not explicitly exclude cases or mention alternatives, like when to use skycut_apply_timeline_edit instead.

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