clip_set_speed

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It explicitly says no audio is processed, the operation is reversible, and speed is a duration multiplier rather than a playback-rate multiplier, with formula and concrete examples. This is exceptionally transparent.

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 front-loaded with purpose and prominently warns about the counterintuitive speed semantics. There is mild redundancy between the prose explanation and the arg list, but the extra length is justified by the subtlety of the behavior.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description provides everything needed for correct invocation: exact meaning of each parameter, behavioral caveats, reversibility path, and a permanent alternative. No critical information is missing.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, but the description fully documents both parameters: key format is defined as 'trackId:itemId', and speed is explained with exact multiplier values and their effect on duration. This fully compensates for the empty 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 opens with a specific action and object: 'Non-destructively change one clip's speed', which clearly states what the tool does. It also names related tools like clip_reset_speed and clip_render_pitch_speed, helping distinguish this operation from reversible and permanent alternatives.

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 that the change is non-destructive and reversible via clip_reset_speed, or can be made permanent with clip_render_pitch_speed. This gives an agent clear decision context, though it does not enumerate every possible alternative such as clip_stretch.

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