consolidate_duplicates

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to state whether the operation is destructive, whether it can be undone, what happens to the original items, or any side effects. 'Consolidates' implies mutation but gives no detail.

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 a single concise sentence with no filler or repetition. It is appropriately front-loaded, though the brevity contributes to the ambiguity noted in other dimensions.

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?

This is a mutation-oriented tool with no annotations, no parameters, and no output schema to clarify behavior. The description gives only a high-level action and omits consequences, scope, and relationship to siblings, leaving an agent without enough context to safely invoke it.

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 has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter semantics. The empty input schema covers everything, and the baseline of 4 for a zero-parameter tool is appropriate.

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 names a specific action ('Consolidates') and a resource ('duplicate media items'), but the verb 'consolidate' is ambiguous — it could mean merging clips, deleting duplicates, relinking, or grouping them in a bin. It does not clearly distinguish from related siblings like consolidate_and_transfer, get_duplicate_media, or apply_cleanup.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this tool versus alternatives. No prerequisites, exclusions, or conditions are provided, and the sole sentence only restates the action without advising on context.

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