select_clip

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the selection side effects: selecting the track, the clip itself, and the time range spanning it. It doesn't mention whether the previous selection is replaced, but for a simple selection tool this is reasonably 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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states purpose and behavior, and a small Args section documents the only parameter. No filler or redundant schema repetition exists.

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 single-parameter selection tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it defines the action, the selection scope, the parameter format, and the parameter source. Nothing required to invoke the tool correctly 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 single parameter key is clearly explained beyond the schema's bare 'string' type. The description specifies the 'trackId:itemId' format and tells the agent exactly where to obtain it (track_get_info's clip list), which fully compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Select') with a clear resource ('a specific clip') and key-based identification. It also states exactly what the selection includes (track, clip, and time range), making the tool's purpose unmistakable and distinct from siblings like select_tracks and select_region.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: when you have a clip key from track_get_info's clip list and want to select that specific clip. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the phrase 'specific clip by key' gives enough context to route an agent away from broader selection tools.

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