select_clips_by_name

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says what it does but not how it affects the current selection, whether existing selection is cleared, how name matching works, or whether partial/wildcard names are supported.

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 extremely short and to the point. The 'Premiere Pro expanded operation:' prefix is minor noise, but the core action is front-loaded and understandable.

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 selection tool with no annotations and no parameter schema, the description is under-specified. It omits important operational details such as how names are matched, whether selection is cumulative, and what happens when no clips match.

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?

There are no structured parameters defined in the schema, so there is little for the description to clarify. The description adds at least the name-based selection criterion, though it does not specify how the name should be passed.

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: 'select clips by name.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like select_clips_by_color and select_all_clips, though it does not explicitly name them as alternatives.

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 is given about when to use this tool versus related selection tools. The phrase 'select clips by name' weakly implies the intended use case, but there is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative tools.

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