track_set_color

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses that the tool modifies a color tag and that color_index 0 means 'no custom color, inherit default', which is useful. It does not mention behavior when no track is selected, whether this affects track headers versus clips, or reversibility, but for a simple color-set operation this is adequate.

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 core action and target are in the first sentence, followed by the key prerequisite and parameter explanation. Every sentence contributes necessary information without excess.

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 tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, valid input range, and the selection prerequisite. A slight gap is the lack of stated error behavior or no-op behavior when no track is selected, but the description is otherwise complete for this simple tool.

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 input schema provides only an integer property with 0% description coverage. The description compensates by documenting the valid range '0 to 9' and the special meaning of 0 ('no custom color, inherit default'). It does not enumerate what each specific color index 1-9 maps to, but it covers the essential semantics.

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 the action ('Set the color tag'), the target ('currently selected track(s)'), and the purpose ('visual organization'). It does not explicitly name a sibling alternative like clip_set_color, but the track scoping makes the resource clear enough to avoid confusion.

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 a concrete usage prerequisite: 'Select tracks first with select_tracks.' This is valuable operational guidance. It does not mention when to use this versus an alternative, so it stops short of full differentiation guidance.

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