create_cue_sequence

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool creates a sequence but doesn't cover critical aspects like permissions required, whether it's idempotent, error handling, or what the output looks like (no output schema). This is a significant gap for a creation tool with multiple parameters.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and wastes no space, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 complexity (5 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, and no annotations), the description is inadequate. It lacks details on behavioral traits, output expectations, and usage context, leaving the agent with insufficient information to invoke the tool confidently in a real-world scenario.

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 80%, providing a solid baseline. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by implying 'sceneIds' are used to build the sequence, but it doesn't explain parameter interactions (e.g., how 'transitionPreferences' affect the sequence) or provide additional context like format examples.

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 the action ('create') and resource ('sequence of lighting cues from existing scenes'), making the purpose evident. It distinguishes from siblings like 'generate_scene' or 'update_cue' by focusing on sequence creation from existing scenes, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with tools like 'generate_act_cues' or 'reorder_cues'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing existing scenes), exclusions (e.g., not for modifying sequences), or comparisons to siblings like 'generate_act_cues' or 'reorder_cues', leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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