set_time_selection

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It notes the unit is seconds, but says nothing about whether this overwrites an existing selection, valid range constraints (e.g. end > start), or whether the loop is activated. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage this is a significant 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?

One tight sentence with no waste and the key qualifier (loop range, seconds) front-loaded. Nothing extraneous, though there is also very little content.

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 simple two-parameter setter this is minimally adequate, but with no annotations and no output schema the description should do more: state the relation to clear_time_selection and whether the loop is engaged. Currently an agent can guess its behavior but not confirm it.

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 0%, so the schema only provides titles 'Start Sec'/'End Sec'. The description's 'in seconds' adds the unit meaning that the schema titles imply but don't fully specify. However, no ordering, range, or validation semantics for start_sec/end_sec are given.

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 (set) and resource (time selection), and the parenthetical '(loop range)' clarifies that this controls the loop region rather than a cursor. It is distinguishable from the sibling clear_time_selection conceptually, though the distinction is not made explicit.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus clear_time_selection, nor prerequisites such as needing a project loaded or a valid range. Usage is only implied by the parenthetical '(loop range)'.

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