crop_clip

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does well: it reveals the non-obvious reuse-or-add behavior and clarifies that omitted parameters retain current/default values. It does not discuss broader side effects, but the core runtime behavior is transparent.

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 sentences with no filler: the action and resource lead, the reuse behavior is explained, and the default handling is stated. Every sentence adds necessary information.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior and default semantics well. It does not mention prerequisites like clip type or return value, but these are minor for an edit operation with fully documented parameters.

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 schema documents all seven parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful cross-parameter semantics by stating that omitted parameters keep their current/default values, which clarifies how partial crop specifications behave beyond the individual schema 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?

The description names a specific action ('Crops a timeline clip'), the exact mechanism (Premiere Pro's built-in Crop video effect), and clears up ambiguity by stating it reuses an existing Crop effect or adds one. This clearly distinguishes crop_clip from generic sibling tools like apply_effect or set_clip_properties.

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 states what it does but gives no explicit guidance on when to choose it over alternatives such as apply_effect or list_clip_effects. There is no mention of scenarios where another tool would be preferable, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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