bulk_edit_clips

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses no mutation semantics beyond the verb: nothing about partial failure handling, atomicity of a batch, index shifting when clips are created, error behavior, or what the call returns. For a bulk mutation tool with zero annotation coverage this is a substantial gap.

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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads both capabilities ('edit' and 'create'). No wasted words, though the terseness is also what leaves behavioral gaps unaddressed.

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 bulk mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain what happens on partial failures, whether creates shift existing clip indices, and how errors are surfaced. None of that is present, leaving the agent under-informed about a genuinely complex 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 description coverage is 100% (both 'names' and 'create' arrays are described in-schema with their item fields), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds nothing about field syntax or index semantics beyond what the schema already states, which is the baseline-3 case.

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?

States a specific verb+resource combination ('batch edit clip names', 'batch create clips') and the word 'bulk/batch' distinguishes it from the single-item siblings set_clip_name and create_clip. It stops short of naming those siblings explicitly, so an agent must infer the routing itself.

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 phrase 'in a single round trip' implies this is the efficient choice when touching many clips, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternatives. Usage is only implied from the 'batch' framing.

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