transport_set_cursor

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does state the core side effect: moving the playback cursor to a given position. However, it does not disclose secondary behavior such as whether playback state is changed, whether the timeline bounds are enforced, or whether selection is affected.

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 purpose sentence is front-loaded and the Args block is compact. There is no filler, and every line contributes either the operation or the required parameter meaning.

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 single-parameter setter with no output schema, the core invocation contract is present. Still, the complete absence of usage guidance and boundary behavior leaves some context gaps that an agent would need to resolve through other tools or trial.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the bare 'Time' title and number type. It does so by defining the lone parameter as 'Position in seconds,' adding both role and unit. It stops short of clarifying whether the position is absolute from project start or relative, but for one parameter this is solid compensation.

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 states a specific verb and object: 'Set the playback cursor position.' The qualifier 'playback' helps separate it from selection/navigation concepts, but it does not explicitly distinguish this from the near-identical sibling cursor_set_position or from raw_seek, so it falls just short of full differentiation.

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 guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives. With siblings like cursor_set_position, raw_seek, and transport_play present, an agent is left to infer which one matches a user request; the description provides no exclusions or preferred scenarios.

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