duplicate_clip_to

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It only states the action without disclosing side effects (e.g., whether the destination clip is overwritten, if audio is affected, or permissions required). This is insufficient for a mutation 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?

The description is very concise with two sentences. It front-loads the action and lists parameters efficiently. However, it lacks structure (e.g., bullet points or sections for parameters).

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 no annotations and an output schema not shown (but present), the description is incomplete. It does not cover edge cases (e.g., what happens if source is empty, destination occupied), error conditions, or return values. A simple tool but needs more context for safe usage.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds that indices are 0-based, which is helpful, but does not explain the role of each parameter beyond the names. More detail about each parameter's meaning or constraints would be needed.

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 'Duplicate a clip from one slot to another.' The verb 'duplicate' and resource 'clip' are specific, and the description distinguishes from sibling tools like duplicate_clip_loop (which duplicates the loop) and other clip operations by specifying source and destination slots.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not state prerequisites, conditions, or when not to use it. The only addition is that indices are 0-based, but no context about intended use cases or exclusions.

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