resolve_create_timeline

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the dry_run/confirm pattern, indicating that dry_run returns a plan without changes and confirm must be true to apply. This is transparent about the tool's safety mechanism, though it could mention potential overwrite behavior or idempotency.

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 two sentences, with the first covering purpose and options, and the second providing usage constraints and alternatives. No redundant information; every clause serves a purpose.

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 tool that creates a timeline with no output schema, the description covers creation options, the critical dry_run/confirm safety pattern, and tier limitations. It could mention the return value format for dry_run, but the existing 'return the plan' sufficently implies a plan object.

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?

All 7 parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds context by grouping clips as 'edit decision list', music_paths as 'optional audio', and explaining dry_run/confirm interplay. This adds meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 it creates a timeline with optional seeding from clips, music, and markers. It distinguishes itself from generate_fcpxml, which is for free Resolve, making the tool's purpose specific and distinct from siblings.

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 explicitly advises to dry_run first then confirm, and notes that this is for Live tier only, with an alternative (generate_fcpxml) for free Resolve. This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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