add_montage_section

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

No annotations are provided, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, asset modification behavior, or error conditions. It only states the intended action without any caveats or runtime implications.

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 very concise, with a single purpose sentence and a structured Args list. Every line is necessary, but the text is under-specified, making it more brief than 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?

Given the lack of annotations and the presence of sibling montage-section tools, the description does not provide enough context about what a montage section is, how sections are ordered, or what the tool returns. The output schema exists but is not utilized in the description.

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 description lists the three arguments with one-line descriptions, but these largely repeat the schema's titles ('Asset Path', 'Start Time') and add minimal value. The only useful addition is 'Start time in seconds', but it lacks context about asset path conventions or section name constraints.

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 clearly states the tool adds a new section to a montage, using the specific verb 'add' and the resource 'montage section'. However, it does not distinguish this from sibling tools like delete_montage_section or set_section_time, and it restates the tool name without additional context.

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. The description only restates the basic action and doesn't mention prerequisites, common use cases, or what distinguishes this from other section-related operations.

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