set_cursor_position

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

The description accurately states the behavior but does not disclose side effects, such as whether playback stops or selection changes. With no annotations, the description should provide more context, though the simplicity of the action mitigates the need.

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?

A single, concise sentence front-loads the core information without any superfluous words. Every word contributes to understanding.

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's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is largely complete. It could mention that the cursor is moved in the project timeline, but the current wording suffices for basic usage.

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 schema defines 'position' as a number with no description. The description adds the unit 'in seconds', which is essential for correct usage. No further details (e.g., valid range) are provided, but the addition meaningfully improves the schema.

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 ('move'), resource ('edit cursor'), and unit ('in seconds'), making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from sibling tools, which do not involve cursor positioning.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Siblings like play_project or stop_transport might be relevant in some contexts, but no comparison is made.

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