announcement_trigger_previous

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action with no details on side effects (e.g., what happens if no previous cue, whether it resets playback, or if it requires an active announcement). This lack of transparency is a significant gap.

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 a single, concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no superfluous words, earning its place efficiently.

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 has no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimal. While it conveys the basic action, it lacks completeness regarding behavioral context (e.g., error states, prerequisites). For a simple trigger, it is adequate but not fully informative.

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 input schema has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. With no parameters, the baseline for parameter semantics is 4 per guidelines. The description adds no parameter info, but this is acceptable since there are none.

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 'Trigger the previous cue in the active announcement,' specifying the verb (trigger), resource (cue), and context (active announcement). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'announcement_trigger_next' and 'announcement_trigger_cue' by indicating 'previous'.

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?

The description implies usage when you want to go to the previous cue, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., active announcement must exist). No exclusionary guidance is provided.

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