remove_clip

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the two critical side effects: linked clips are removed by default and ripple closes the timeline gap. It omits reversibility (undo), permission/state requirements, and what happens to indices after a ripple delete.

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?

Two compact sentences with the destructive action and the linked-media default front-loaded, followed by the ripple behavior. Nothing is wasted and the reader can act after one line.

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 five-parameter mutation tool with no output schema but full parameter documentation, the description covers what is deleted and the ripple consequence. What's missing is post-delete state (index shifts, empty tracks), which an agent would want before chaining calls.

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 100%, so every parameter is already documented, including the defaults for ripple and includeLinked. The description restates those defaults rather than adding new meaning such as index invalidation behavior or when to override includeLinked.

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 verb and resource ('Delete a clip') and adds the key scope detail that linked audio/video are removed by default. It implicitly separates itself from siblings like razor_clip and close_gaps, though it never names which operation to prefer.

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 'ripple=true closes the gap' clause hints at the tradeoff between deleting with and without ripple, implying close_gaps/ripple_delete_range are alternatives. However, it never explicitly says when to pick this tool over those siblings or what prerequisites apply.

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