get_sequence_duration

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes beyond them by emphasizing it changes nothing and, crucially, disclosing that frames are tick-resolution, not display frames, plus the exact return shape. Return/pagination details are the only remaining 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?

Front-loaded with the purpose and scope, then the return contract. Two sentences plus a compact returns line with no filler; the returns line is somewhat redundant with the prose but earns its place by fixing exact field names and units.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return shape itself and does so precisely, including units (seconds vs tick frames) and the matching rule. Combined with annotations, an agent has everything needed to invoke and interpret the call.

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% and the single parameter is fully documented in the schema (asset name, not path; first match under /Game). The description repeats the case-insensitive matching detail rather than adding new parameter meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (reads) and resource (playback range of a Level Sequence), and distinguishes itself from siblings by noting it does so 'without changing it'. The return contract is spelled out, so an agent can differentiate it from get_sequence_frame_rate/get_timeline_info without opening the schema.

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?

Clarifies the lookup semantics ('first under /Game whose asset name matches, case-insensitive') and points to get_timeline_info as the sibling that also reports rates. It gives clear context but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over the frame-rate or timeline sibling for overlapping needs.

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