set_time_selection

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

The description states that the tool sets the time selection, and the destructiveHint annotation already communicates that this is not a destructive operation. It does not add behavioral context such as whether the existing selection is replaced or what happens if start/end are out of order, but for a simple two-number setter the baseline behavior is clear.

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 two short sentences plus a compact arg list. It leads with the primary action and uses a clear Args block with no padding or redundant phrasing.

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 two-parameter setter, the description provides the action and parameter semantics needed to invoke it. It omits optional context like return behavior and validation, but the low complexity plus destructiveHint=false make the description adequately 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?

The schema only declares two numbers, while the description defines each parameter's meaning and unit ('Start time in seconds', 'End time in seconds'). This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage and gives the agent the necessary semantics to call the tool with correct values.

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 names the operation ('Set') and the resource ('time selection'), which is clear and distinct from the sibling get_time_selection and clear_time_selection. It is slightly minimal, essentially unpacking the tool name, so it stops short of a fully differentiated 5.

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?

Usage is implied by the tool name: you call this when you want to establish a time selection. The description gives no explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance, nor does it mention related tools such as get_time_selection or clear_time_selection.

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