Retrieve the current animation timeline state, including time, frame, total frames, frame rate, selection, and speed, from a running Marmoset Toolbag 5 scene.
Animation timeline: time, frame, total frames, frame rate, selection, speed.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare this as a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world operation, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only a list of timeline fields and does not disclose additional behavior such as whether it returns current state, units, or dynamic values.
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 a single compact fragment with no wasted words and is front-loaded with the resource. It is very terse, however, and its fragmentary style omits an explicit action verb.
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 zero-parameter read tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the description is largely sufficient because the output schema defines the return values. It could still more clearly state that it retrieves the current animation timeline state.
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 takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics burden for the description to carry. The baseline for zero-parameter tools 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 the resource ('Animation timeline') and lists the fields involved, but it never uses a verb like 'get' or 'returns'. The purpose is inferable from the tool name and sibling timeline_set, but the description itself only vaguely states what the tool does.
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 instead of timeline_set or other scene-inspection tools. The field list implies it is for reading timeline values, but no conditions, alternatives, or exclusions are stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.