replay_autoplay

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden and does well: it labels the operation STATE_MUTATING, describes it as starting or pausing autoplay, and states the precondition that Replay mode must be active. It does not clarify reversibility or what happens to speed when toggled off.

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?

Front-loaded action statement followed by labeled WHEN TO USE, SIDE EFFECTS, and LIMITATIONS sections. The label scaffolding is a touch formulaic, but every line conveys operational information and there is no filler.

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 single-optional-parameter toggle with no annotations or output schema, the description supplies the key facts an agent needs: mutation semantics, the replay-mode precondition, and the usage trigger. Only fine details (exact toggle-off behavior, whether the speed persists) are absent.

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 description coverage is 100% and the 'speed' parameter is fully documented there, including units, direction, default, and the empty-value behavior. The description adds only the phrase 'configurable speed', so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action and scope: toggling automatic bar playback within replay mode, with a configurable speed. This is clearly distinct from siblings like replay_step (manual advancement) or replay_start (session initiation), though it does not name those siblings explicitly.

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 'WHEN TO USE' clause gives a concrete trigger ('letting historical playback run continuously at set speed'), which is better than most. It stops short of stating when NOT to use it or naming replay_step/replay_start as alternatives for manual or non-autoplay workflows.

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