set_playhead_position

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the core behavior (setting the playhead) but does not disclose any side effects (e.g., impact on selection or playback state) or potential errors (e.g., invalid sequenceId). For a simple setter, this is adequate but minimal; it adds little beyond the name.

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, clear sentence that directly states the function. No redundant words or unnecessary details. 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 simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description is sufficient to understand the tool's action. It does not explain edge cases like invalid times or sequence states, but for a basic setter, this is complete enough. Could mention if the sequence must be open, but not critical.

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 already describes both parameters (sequenceId and time) with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning about how these parameters interact (e.g., time units, playhead behavior). Since schema coverage is high, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Sets the playhead position') with a specific resource ('playhead (CTI)') and location ('in the specified sequence'). It distinguishes from siblings like get_playhead_position (read) and move_playhead_to_edit (different movement logic) by the explicit 'position' and 'specified sequence' phrasing.

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, such as move_playhead_to_edit or get_playhead_position. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or fallback tools. With a large sibling set, this is a significant gap.

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