clip_stretch

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It richly explains the non-obvious delta_sec sign convention, the growing vs. shrinking behavior, and the time-stretching fallback. It does not explicitly state whether shrinking is destructive or undoable, but the provided behavioral detail is substantial.

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 the core behavior, followed by the critical sign-convention warning and then parameter explanations. Every sentence adds necessary information, and the example is compact yet highly clarifying.

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?

The tool has four parameters and a counterintuitive sign convention, but the description covers all of them, offers a real example, and explains the underlying audio behavior. Even without an output schema, the agent has enough to invoke the tool correctly.

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%, so the description must explain all parameters, and it does. It documents key format, side values, delta_sec sign semantics with a concrete example, and min_clip_duration's default and purpose.

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 states a specific verb ('grow or shrink') and resource ('a clip's left or right edge'), making the operation immediately clear. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explaining the sign convention relative to clip_trim and the behavior when no trimmed audio remains.

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 gives clear context for when this tool is appropriate: growing reveals previously-trimmed audio, and shrinking reduces the clip inward. It references clip_trim's sign convention but does not explicitly state when to choose clip_stretch over clip_trim or other editing tools.

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