set_override_frame_rate

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Expanded operation' hints at an internal or advanced behavior but does not disclose whether this mutates project state, which object is affected, whether there are side effects on playback or rendering, or what the result of the override is. The description adds almost no behavioral context beyond the action implied by the name.

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 and the core action is front-loaded, but the phrase 'Premiere Pro expanded operation' is boilerplate and does not earn its place. It is under-specification rather than genuinely helpful conciseness.

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 mutating setter with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at least explain the target, the kind of value being overridden, and expected side effects. None of that is present. The phrase 'expanded operation' raises questions rather than resolving them.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameters for the description to clarify. The empty schema plus no-parameter signal means the description does not need to compensate, making a baseline 4 appropriate.

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 verb and resource: "set override frame rate" makes the core action clear. However, it is essentially the tool name with spaces, and the qualifier "Premiere Pro expanded operation" does not explain what 'override frame rate' means or which object it applies to. It is minimally distinguishable from sibling tools like set_override_pixel_aspect_ratio only through the resource name.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no mention of prerequisites such as an active sequence or selected clip, and no description of what an 'expanded operation' is. The agent is left to infer the tool's place among the many sequence and clip settings tools.

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