Set Sequence In Out Points

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

Annotations declare a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive mutation. The description adds the validation rule ('out_seconds must be after in_seconds and not past the sequence end') and the read-back behavior, which is useful, but discloses nothing about required context (active sequence, edit permissions) or what existing in/out points are replaced.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the key constraint. No filler, no redundancy.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and the critical ordering/bounds constraint is stated. What remains missing is the operational precondition (an active sequence) and the relationship to sibling in/out tools, but for a two-parameter mutation this is largely adequate.

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 100% and both parameter descriptions already state the same constraints the prose repeats. The description adds no syntax, unit, or default detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Set the sequence in and out points') plus a secondary effect ('read them back'), which an agent can map to the sequence-level in/out range concept. It stops short of distinguishing itself from close siblings like set_source_in_out, set_item_in_out, or clear_sequence_in_out.

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 parenthetical '(for an export range, etc.)' gives a hint of intended use, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance, and no naming of the alternatives (get_sequence_in_out_points, clear_sequence_in_out) that an agent might confuse it with.

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