ass_scale_times

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the scaling formula, that factor must be > 0, and that round_ms rounds computed times before writing. However, it does not state whether changes are undoable, what permissions are required, or what happens when selection is null/default.

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 front-loaded with the operation and formula, followed by structured Args and Returns sections. It is mostly efficient, but the Returns block duplicates the output schema and could be trimmed.

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 timing mutation tool with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, the description covers the mathematical operation and parameters well. It lacks prerequisites, default behavior, and side-effect disclosure, which are important given the absence of annotations.

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 document all five parameters. It does so for factor, doc_id, origin, and round_ms, though selection is only documented by reference to ass_shift_times and doc_id is minimally described as 'document id'.

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 states a specific verb and resource: scaling the timing of selected lines around an origin, and gives the exact formula. This clearly distinguishes it from timing siblings like ass_shift_times or ass_set_times, which do not scale around an origin.

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 does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ass_shift_times, ass_set_times, or ass_snap_to_frames. The only sibling reference is for the selection parameter, not as usage guidance.

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