Get Sequence Structure

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description mostly restates the tool's informational content rather than adding behavioral details such as performance implications or edge cases. No contradiction with annotations.

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: the first front-loads the core scope and contents, the second provides a practical use case. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant filler.

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?

Given the low parameter count, strong annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description is nearly complete. The only notable gap is that it says 'active sequence' without explicitly noting that sequence_id can override that default, though the input schema covers this.

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 schema fully documents the single optional sequence_id parameter (100% coverage), so the description doesn't need to explain it. The phrase 'active sequence' confirms the default behavior but doesn't add meaning beyond what the schema already states.

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 names a specific verb and resource: it 'Get[s] a complete structural overview' of a sequence, and enumerates the contents (tracks, clips with positions, gaps, clip metadata). It is clear, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from overlapping siblings like get_full_sequence_info, get_timeline_summary, or list_sequence_tracks.

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 useful context ('Essential for understanding timeline state before making edits'), which implies when an agent might want this tool. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over the many related sibling query tools, and it names no alternatives.

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