link_audio_video

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, but it only restates the core action. It does not disclose side effects, whether the operation is reversible, what happens if the clip is already in the requested state, or whether the clip must have separate audio and video tracks.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to identifying the operation and its dual behavior.

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 simple two-parameter toggle, the core action is clear and the schema fully documents parameters. However, the lack of usage guidance relative to link_selection/unlink_selection and the absence of behavioral caveats make it only minimally viable for an agent choosing among similar tools.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the schema already explains both clipId and linked. The description adds no extra semantic meaning beyond the boolean direction of the operation, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 states a specific verb ('Links or unlinks') and a specific resource ('audio and video components of a clip'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like link_selection/unlink_selection that operate on selections rather than audio/video component linkage.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as link_selection or unlink_selection. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or a preferred context, leaving the agent to infer applicability from the name alone.

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