get_song_smpte_time

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the result includes hours, minutes, seconds, and frames, but does not explicitly state side-effect-free behavior or dependencies (e.g., transport state), though 'Get' implies a read operation.

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 focused sentences with no redundant filler. The description is front-loaded with the verb and output format, followed by the return-value breakdown.

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?

The description is sufficient for a simple no-parameter getter and it names the returned components. However, it misses an opportunity to distinguish from the sibling `get_song_time`, so it's not fully complete in the broader tool 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?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema is empty (100% covered), so there are no parameter semantics for the description to add. Baseline 4 applies because a no-parameter tool requires no further parameter explanation.

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 ('Get') and resource ('current song time') and clearly specifies the format (SMPTE/timecode). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling `get_song_time`, so it's clear but lacks sibling differentiation.

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 choose this over `get_song_time` or other time-related tools. The description only states the operation, with no use-case context, exclusions, or alternatives.

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