set_clip_speed

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose two useful traits: linked audio follows the speed change, and ripple causes later clips to shift or close up. However, it says nothing about the effects of reverse or maintainPitch, whether keyframes/effects survive retiming, outcome when the clip has no linked audio, or permissions — for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage that's a real gap.

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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences with no filler; the core action and units come first. Slight tightening possible, but every sentence carries information.

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 7-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the primary behavior but omits handling of reverse, pitch preservation, and what the tool returns or how errors surface. It is minimum viable rather than complete.

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 description explains the speed parameter's value semantics and restates ripple behavior (already partly covered by the schema), but two of the seven parameters — reverse and the default of maintainPitch — get no meaningful explanation in the description. At 71% schema coverage the schema carries most of the weight, making this an adequate-but-not-additive 3.

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 ('Change clip speed') and unpacks the unit convention with concrete examples (1 = normal, 2 = 200%, 0.5 = 50%), so the agent understands exactly what the operation does. No sibling tool competes for this action, so differentiation is implicit but unambiguous.

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 when to use it (retiming a clip) and gives the ripple behavior, but there are no explicit when-not conditions or pointers to related retiming tools like trim_clip or slip_clip for the agent to compare against.

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