cascadeur_set_range

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the mutation is clear. The description adds one useful behavioral clarification: it doesn't allocate animation data or add keyframes. This adds context beyond the annotations, but it doesn't describe other behavioral effects like overwriting existing boundaries or affecting the active action.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the main action and a clarifying non-effect. Every phrase earns its place with no superfluous detail.

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?

For a simple two-integer setter, the description is mostly complete: it states the purpose and clarifies what it doesn't do. Minor gaps remain, such as whether the range applies to the active scene, action, or playback context, but the low complexity plus annotations make this reasonably sufficient.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. 'Playback boundaries' gives contextual meaning that first and last are boundary frame numbers, which helps map the two integer parameters to the tool's purpose. However, it doesn't explain ordering requirements, inclusivity, or how values relate to the animation timeline.

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 states the core action clearly: 'Set playback boundaries.' This identifies the specific resource being modified and is appropriately scoped. The second sentence helps distinguish it from animation/keyframe tools, though it doesn't explicitly name the sibling alternatives.

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 gives some implied usage guidance by stating what it does not do ('does not allocate animation data or add keyframes'), which helps prevent misuse for keyframe creation. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to prefer this over related tools like cascadeur_set_frame or cascadeur_select_frames.

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