clip_operation

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true. The description reinforces this by mentioning 'discard material' and 'copy notes', which imply modification. It adds useful behavioral context like transposition behavior and pitch=-1 meaning all pitches.

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 concise, using a single sentence with a list of operations. It front-loads the core purpose ('Structural clip edits') and efficiently packs details about each operation. Minor improvement could be breaking into clearer bullet points.

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 8 parameters (3 required) and presence of an output schema, the description covers the main operations and relevant parameters. It is sufficiently complete for an experienced user, though some edge-case behaviors (e.g., error handling) are not covered.

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%, but the description explains the key 'op' parameter with examples and clarifies pitch=-1. It also provides context for region_start, region_length, destination_time within duplicate_region. Other common parameters (track_index, clip_index) are not described but are typically well-understood.

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 performs 'Structural clip edits' and lists three specific operations (duplicate_loop, crop, duplicate_region) with brief explanations. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like edit_notes or delete_clip by focusing on structural manipulations.

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 explains what each operation does and when to use them (e.g., 'extend 2 bars to 4 before adding variation' for duplicate_loop). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives like edit_notes for note-level changes.

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