raw_cursor_long_jump_left

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly warns that the action 'May open a dialog or change project state' and advises inspecting the command name first, which is valuable cautionary context beyond the tool's basic purpose.

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?

The description is three short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core action first, then adds the no-argument note and the side-effect warning, all of which earn their place.

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 no-argument tool, the description covers what it does, that it takes no arguments, and that it may have side effects. The only slight gap is that 'inspect the command name first' is a vague instruction without explaining what to inspect or why.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is little to clarify. The description reinforces this with 'no-argument,' making the absence of required inputs explicit and helping the agent understand no schema details are needed.

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 clearly states the operation: 'Move the cursor 15 seconds left.' It gives a specific verb, resource, and distance, and the mention of 'Static no-argument Audacity action' helps distinguish it from parameterized or alternative cursor movement tools among siblings.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like raw_cursor_left or raw_cursor_long_jump_right. The description implies its use for a 15-second left jump, but it does not state conditions or exclusions.

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