list_sequences

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It states that the tool lists all sequences and additionally reports the active sequence, which is a meaningful behavioral detail beyond just 'list sequences'. It does not mention potential side effects, but for a read-only list operation this is acceptable; however, it lacks details on return format or ordering.

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, efficient sentence that conveys both the primary action (list sequences) and a key output (active sequence). There is no redundancy or unnecessary information; every word earns its 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?

Given the tool's simplicity—no parameters, no output schema, and a straightforward listing operation—the description fully covers what the tool does and what it returns. It is appropriately scoped for the low complexity, and no critical information is missing.

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 accepts zero parameters, and the schema properties are empty (100% coverage by default). The baseline for 0-parameter tools is 4, and the description correctly avoids adding unnecessary parameter details. It adds no parameter semantics because none exist.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource 'every sequence in the project' while also adding the unique outcome of indicating which sequence is active. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_project_items, which focus on media items rather than sequences.

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?

The description implies usage for retrieving all sequences and the active one, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., set_active_sequence) or mention any exclusions. The context of a read-only listing is clear, but explicit guidance is absent.

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