Builds a new sequence that matches your clips' settings, placing the specified project items in the order you provide. Use it to turn selected clips into a ready-to-edit timeline.
Create a sequence matching the clips' settings, with the clips placed in order
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | No | ||
| binPath | No | Bin for the new sequence | |
| nodeIds | Yes | Project item nodeIds in the order to place them |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the sequence matches the clips' settings and preserves the given order, but it does not explain required project context, mutation effects, default naming, bin behavior, or failure conditions.
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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary wording. It efficiently conveys the core action, source material, and ordering 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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is under-specified. It does not cover project prerequisites, naming behavior, bin placement, side effects, or what an agent should expect after creation.
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 67%, with nodeIds and binPath already described in the schema. The description reinforces that clips are placed in order and that their settings are used, but it adds little for the undocumented name parameter and does not clarify default naming or binPath 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 states a specific verb and resource: "Create a sequence" from clips, with clips placed in order. It implicitly distinguishes itself from a plain sequence-creation tool by saying the sequence matches the clips' settings, but it does not explicitly name the sibling alternative.
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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings such as create_sequence, clone_sequence, or import_sequences. The usage is inferable from "from clips," but no conditions, prerequisites, or alternatives are stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.