get_playhead_position

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It states 'gets' indicating a read operation, but does not explicitly disclose side effects, permissions, or return format. For a simple getter, this is minimal but acceptable; however, it leaves ambiguity about error conditions and result structure.

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, focused sentence that clearly communicates the tool's purpose with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient, containing all essential information without verbosity.

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?

With no output schema, the description should clarify the return value format, but it only says 'position' without specifying units (seconds, frames, timecode). This ambiguity could hinder an agent's interpretation. Additionally, it doesn't mention requirements like an open sequence, though it is implied.

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 fully describes the single parameter (sequenceId) with a description, and the tool description merely restates 'specified sequence' without adding additional meaning. Since schema coverage is 100%, baseline is 3.

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 (gets), the resource (playhead/CTI position), and the scope (specified sequence). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like set_playhead_position and other position-related tools.

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 for reading the playhead position but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or any exclusions. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., open sequence) or when not to use it.

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