get_sequence_in_out_points

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry full behavioral transparency. It only states 'Gets the in and out points' with no mention of side effects, error conditions, or return behavior. It implies a read-only operation but does not explicitly state it.

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?

One clear, front-loaded sentence that communicates the core functionality with no unnecessary words. Perfectly concise.

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 low complexity (single parameter, no output schema), the description is sufficient for a basic understanding. It clearly states what is retrieved, though it doesn't specify the output format or any constraints. The lack of output schema means the description could have elaborated on return values, but for a simple getter, it is adequate.

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 single parameter 'sequenceId' is fully described in the schema ('The ID of the sequence'), and the description adds no additional context about the parameter beyond that. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3; no further credit is warranted.

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 tool's function: 'Gets the in and out points of a sequence timeline.' It uses a specific verb ('Gets') and resource ('in and out points of a sequence'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'set_sequence_in_out_points' by being the getter.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool, what prerequisites exist, or how it differs from alternatives like 'clear_sequence_in_out' or 'get_playhead_position'. The agent gets no help in tool selection.

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