scene_fire

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

Despite no annotations, the description explicitly discloses that the tool is NOT idempotent, that re-triggering restarts clips, returns the scene name, and marks async transport verification as unverified. This goes beyond what annotations would typically provide.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action. The non-idempotency warning is crucial and efficiently communicated. No unnecessary words.

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 simple tool with one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers purpose, usage context, behavioral traits (non-idempotent, return value), and an internal effect (transport verification mark). It is sufficiently complete.

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 0% and the description only mentions 'by index' without adding meaning beyond the parameter name. The integer 'index' with minimum 0 is self-explanatory from the schema, and the description does not clarify its range or behavior (e.g., what happens if out of range). Minimal value added.

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 'Fire' and clearly identifies the resource as 'Session view scene by index', triggering all clips on that row. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'clip_fire' (fires single clip) and 'play' (general transport).

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 provides context by stating 'Use for arrangement-style playback from scenes.' It does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, but the context helps guide selection among siblings.

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