set_time_selection

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing. It does not say whether an existing selection is overwritten, whether loop points or regions are affected, or whether the selection is clamped to project bounds.

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?

Brief and front-loaded, with the action in the first line and parameter documentation following. The docstring-style 'Args:' block is functional, though slightly format-heavy for a two-sentence payload.

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 mutation with no output schema, the essentials are present, but an agent still lacks the side effects (overwrite semantics, interaction with loop/region state) needed to invoke it reliably in a DAW context.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does supply units for both parameters ('time in seconds'), which the schema lacks. However, it gives no reference point for those seconds (project timeline, absolute vs. relative) and no constraints or ordering rules.

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 time selection') that an agent can distinguish from siblings like get_time_selection and clear_time_selection. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from those siblings, but the name plus description is unambiguous about the operation.

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?

No guidance on when to call this versus clear_time_selection or get_time_selection, and no preconditions (e.g., whether a project/edit cursor context is required). The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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