clip_reset_pitch

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

With no annotations, the description carries responsibility for explaining behavior. 'Revert' clearly indicates a state-changing operation, and the link to clip_set_pitch clarifies the scope. However, it does not disclose what happens when no pitch change exists or whether the operation affects other clip properties.

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 direct sentence plus a compact argument definition. No filler, fluff, or repetition of schema details.

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 reset tool, the description is largely sufficient: it explains the action and the key format. It could be more complete by noting the relationship to clip_reset_pitch_speed, but this is a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.

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%, but the description fully compensates by explaining the only parameter: key is the clip's key in 'trackId:itemId' format. This adds meaningful information beyond the schema's bare 'string' type.

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 and resource: 'Revert a clip's pitch change'. It also names the paired tool clip_set_pitch, making the operation unambiguous and differentiating it from speed resets.

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 'made via clip_set_pitch' implies the tool should be used after a pitch change was applied, but it does not explicitly contrast with siblings like clip_reset_pitch_speed or clip_reset_speed. Usage context is clear but alternatives are not addressed.

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