import_library_graphic

Does 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 tool mutates the timeline by placing a graphic and can set values, but it does not cover permissions, failure modes, track constraints, default duration behavior, or what the operation returns.

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 text. It states the core action immediately and appends the optional behavior compactly.

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 tool with four required parameters, a nested object parameter, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain key parameter behavior, prerequisites, discovery of library graphics, or how the placed graphic is represented after insertion.

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 only 33%, with no descriptions for start, graphic, trackIndex, or duration. The description loosely maps to 'properties' via 'text/values' and to trackIndex via 'video track,' but it does not compensate for the undocumented required parameters or explain duration/time 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: 'Place a graphic from a Creative Cloud Library on a video track,' with optional text/value assignment. This is clear enough to distinguish it from generic clip insertion, but it does not explicitly contrast it with nearby tools such as list_library_graphics or import_mogrt.

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 tool places a library graphic on a video track, but gives no guidance on when to choose it over related tools like list_library_graphics, import_mogrt, or place_mogrt_with_media. No prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative-selection guidance are provided.

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