razor_all_tracks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It implies a destructive editing action on the timeline, but it does not state whether the edit affects locked tracks, whether it acts at the playhead, whether it is undoable, or what timeline state is required.

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 'razor all tracks' is essentially a restatement of the tool name, and 'Premiere Pro expanded operation' is filler. It is under-specified rather than efficiently informative.

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?

With no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should clarify the operation's preconditions and effects, such as active sequence, playhead position, and which tracks are included. It only names the operation, leaving critical invocation context implicit.

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 declared parameters and 100% schema coverage, so there is no parameter information the description must supply. The empty schema makes parameter semantics a non-issue.

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 and resource: 'razor all tracks.' It is not vague, but it does not differentiate this operation from sibling tools like razor_at, razor_timeline_at_time, or split_clip, and 'Premiere Pro expanded operation' adds no semantic clarity.

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 the many similar editing siblings. There are no stated preconditions, alternatives, or conditions that would help an agent choose it over razor_timeline_at_time or razor_at.

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