get_clip_markers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description itself must disclose behavior. It only repeats the operation name and gives no indication of return value, whether it requires an active selection, or whether it is a read-only fetch. The verb 'get' weakly implies read-only, but the description fails to provide meaningful behavioral context.

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 short but mostly duplicates the tool name and adds a boilerplate 'Premiere Pro expanded operation' prefix. The one clause that could be informative — 'get clip markers' — simply restates the tool name. It is concise but not information-dense.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should explain what a successful call returns and what 'clip' refers to (selected clip, active project item). It provides neither, leaving ambiguity against siblings. This is under-specified for correct agent invocation.

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 input schema has zero declared parameters, and the context signal confirms 0 parameters, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. Baseline 4 applies; the description doesn't add param detail, but none is required.

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 clear verb+object ('get clip markers'), so a reader can infer it retrieves clip markers. However, it doesn't explain scope (selected clip? all clips?) or distinguish it from sibling get_sequence_markers_by_type / list_markers. The 'Premiere Pro expanded operation' preamble adds no specificity.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives like list_markers or get_sequence_markers_by_type. It doesn't state prerequisites, such as a selected clip, or context in which clip markers are needed. This is entirely absent.

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