set_clip_properties

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It states only that properties are set, giving no information about overwrite semantics, whether partial property updates are allowed, interaction with keyframes, or whether prior property values are affected. This is a meaningful gap for a mutating tool.

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?

A single compact sentence that starts with the verb, names the target, and lists the property set. No filler or repetition.

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?

Given the schema covers parameters well, the definition is minimally viable for invoking the tool. However, with no annotations or output schema, and with several very similar sibling tools, the lack of any note about partial updates, return behavior, or relationship to individual setters leaves the agent to infer important calling conventions.

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 fully documents both parameters and the nested property fields, including units and the pixel-to-normalized conversion for position, so the description need not repeat those details. It adds only the 'Motion properties' grouping label, which is useful but not essential.

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 uses a specific verb ('Sets') with a clear resource ('Motion properties of a clip') and enumerates the exact properties involved (opacity, scale, rotation, position). It distinguishes the tool from unrelated timeline edit tools, although it does not explicitly differentiate it from the granular sibling setters like set_clip_opacity or set_clip_scale.

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 on when to choose this combined setter over the individual set_clip_* siblings or set_clip_properties_batch. The description implies general use for motion properties but provides no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative references.

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