set_in_point

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention side effects (e.g., overwriting existing in-point), frame validation, or any impact on playback. Minimal transparency beyond the basic action.

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 very short and front-loaded with the purpose. The args line is somewhat redundant with the schema but adds a bit of explanation. It could include more useful info without being verbose, but it's efficient.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter) and existence of output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It lacks context on constraints, side effects, or typical usage scenarios, but provides the core purpose and parameter meaning.

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 description adds 'Frame number for the in-point' to the parameter, clarifying its purpose. However, with 0% schema coverage, it could provide more detail (e.g., valid range, units). Adds basic meaning beyond schema but lacks depth.

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 verb 'Set' and the resource 'in-point', and explains it as the 'start of playback range'. This distinguishes it from siblings like set_out_point and get_in_out_points.

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 tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, context, or when not to use it. The description only states the function without usage direction.

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