duplicate_sequence

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses that the operation copies the sequence, that clearContents=true yields an empty copy, and that the copy inherits frame rate, resolution, and track layout. It notably explains the create_sequence limitation. It does not cover name-conflict behavior or return value, but core mutation behavior is well conveyed.

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 with no filler. The first sentence states the core operation, and the second adds a high-value usage caveat with a crisp contrast to create_sequence. Every sentence earns its place.

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 low-complexity tool with full schema coverage, the description is nearly complete: it covers purpose, parameter semantics, default behavior, and the key alternative. Minor gaps such as name collisions or return behavior are not critical for correctly selecting and invoking the tool.

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 the schema fully documents all three parameters. The description adds practical rationale for clearContents=true and names the inherited settings, but it largely reinforces what the schema already says rather than adding new parameter meanings. Baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Creates a copy of an existing sequence with a new name.' This unambiguously distinguishes it from related siblings like delete_sequence, duplicate_clip, and create_sequence while also naming the create_sequence alternative in the same description.

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 tells the agent when to use the clearContents=true path and why: to get an empty, correctly-specced blank target when create_sequence would ignore frame rate. This is concrete, decision-relevant guidance that names the alternative tool and the condition that selects it.

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