Press Eos Go

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, and idempotentHint=false. The description adds that it advances sequentially, which is useful context, but doesn't disclose additional behavioral details beyond what annotations already convey. No contradiction exists.

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 plus a bullet, front-loaded with the action and purpose. No wasted words; every sentence earns its place, including the sibling comparison.

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 (one optional parameter, clear annotations, no output schema), the description is complete. It covers the action, the norm of use, the alternative, and the parameter semantics adequately.

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 description's arg bullet mirrors the schema exactly ('Cue list to advance. Omit to press Go on the default/active cue list.' vs schema's 'Cue list to advance; omit for the active list'). No additional semantic value is 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 clearly states the action: 'Press the [Go] button on a cue list, advancing to the next cue in sequence.' It specifies the exact verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from eos_fire_cue by contrasting sequential advancement with jumping to an arbitrary cue.

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?

It explicitly says when to use this tool (the normal way a show runs) and contrasts it with eos_fire_cue which jumps out of order. This gives clear guidance on when to choose this over an alternative.

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