get_sequence_frame_rate

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: it clarifies this is the tick resolution rather than the display rate, notes it does not mutate the asset, and states the returned fields. It stops short of noting behavior when no asset matches under /Game, but that is a minor gap against strong annotation coverage.

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 tightly written sentences: the core action is front-loaded, the disambiguation follows, then the return shape. Every sentence earns its place with no padding.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description supplies the return field list, the rate-type distinction, and the alternative tools. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 100%, so the schema already explains that sequence_name is the asset name under /Game rather than a path. The description adds no format or syntax detail beyond this, so the baseline of 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?

The description names a specific verb and resource ("Reads the tick resolution of a Level Sequence"), and explicitly contrasts it with the display rate and with sibling names like get_timeline_info and set_sequence_frame_rate. An agent can distinguish it from the other sequence tools without opening any 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?

Explicit routing is provided: use get_timeline_info to read the display rate and set_sequence_frame_rate to change either value. When-to-use and which-alternative are both stated, leaving nothing to inference.

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