Creates a new sequence from the active sequence's in/out range, optionally including all tracks instead of only targeted ones, to isolate a selected portion of the edit.
Make a new sequence from the active sequence's in/out range
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ignoreTrackTargeting | No | Include all tracks, not only targeted ones |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says a new sequence is created from the in/out range; it does not explain whether the new sequence becomes active, how track targeting is affected, what happens when no in/out range exists, or any permissions or side effects.
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 wasted words. It immediately identifies the operation and its source range.
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 too sparse. It omits important behavioral context such as the active-sequence prerequisite, what the resulting sequence contains, and how the optional track-targeting parameter changes the outcome.
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 100%, so the schema already explains that ignoreTrackTargeting includes all tracks rather than only targeted ones. The description itself adds no parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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?
States a specific action and source object: create a new sequence from the active sequence's in/out range. This distinguishes it somewhat from siblings like create_sequence and create_sequence_from_clips, though it does not name alternatives explicitly.
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 implies the use case by naming the active sequence's in/out range as the source, but it does not explain when to choose this over create_sequence, create_sequence_from_clips, or clone_sequence, nor does it state exclusions or prerequisites beyond the active sequence context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.