set_sequence_settings

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses that values are written, read back, and that fields Premiere accepted but did not change are reported. It also corrects an outdated assumption that frame size cannot be changed after creation. This goes beyond a basic 'updates settings' statement.

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 compact, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and contains no filler. The codebase note about frame size adds useful context, though it is slightly internally focused and not strictly necessary for an agent.

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?

Despite having no output schema or annotations, the description covers what settings are updated, what behavior occurs after the update, and a nuanced constraint about frame size. It does not describe return format explicitly or alternative tool routing, but for a two-parameter settings tool it provides enough to invoke correctly.

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 already fully describes both parameters and every nested property, so the description adds little beyond a brief restatement of the fields to update. Since schema_description_coverage is 100%, the baseline score of 3 is 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 uses a specific verb (updates) and explicitly names the four fields affected: width, height, frameRate, and pixelAspectRatio. This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like set_sequence_audio_settings and single-property setters such as set_sequence_resolution.

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 implies the tool is for updating video-related sequence settings but does not explicitly say when to choose it over alternatives like set_sequence_resolution or set_sequence_pixel_aspect_ratio. The frame-size correction is useful context, but no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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