clear_arrangement

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that this is a bulk removal scoped to Arrangement and that Session clips are preserved, but says nothing about reversibility/undo, confirmation, or return behavior for an unambiguously destructive operation.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the destructive action and immediately qualified by the scope limitation. No wasted words.

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 simple one-parameter destructive tool with no annotations or output schema, the description covers action and scope but omits any note on reversibility or prerequisites, leaving meaningful gaps for a destructive operation.

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?

Schema coverage is 0% and the single parameter track_index is undocumented in both the schema and the description. The intent of the index is inferable, but the description adds no meaning such as indexing basis or whether it must exist.

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+resource ('Remove every clip from a track's Arrangement timeline') and delimits scope by noting Session clips stay, which effectively distinguishes it from delete_clip and stop_track_clips without naming them.

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 parenthetical scoping note implies when this is the right choice (clearing the Arrangement only), but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or named alternative for removing a single clip versus all clips.

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