resolve_set_current_timeline

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses meaningful selection behavior: name is preferred, index is used only when name is empty, and indexes are 1-based. It does not mention error behavior for invalid names or out-of-range indexes, which keeps it from a 5.

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 brief and front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by a compact parameter breakdown. Every sentence earns its place and there is no redundant or promotional language.

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 setter with two optional parameters and an output schema, the description covers the core invocation logic well. It is missing guidance on where to obtain valid timeline names or indexes (e.g., resolve_list_timelines), but the tool is simple enough that this is not a severe gap.

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 for both parameters. It adds significant meaning beyond the schema by explaining that name is preferred, index is a fallback, and indexes are 1-based. It does not clarify how the default index of 0 behaves, which is a minor gap.

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 a specific verb ('Switch to') and resource ('timeline'), and clarifies that switching can be done by name or index. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_current_timeline and list_timelines, which read rather than mutate state.

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 clearly implies this tool is for changing the active timeline, but it does not explicitly explain when to prefer this tool over siblings such as resolve_list_timelines or resolve_get_current_timeline. The in-tool guidance about preferring name over index is useful, but no alternative tool routing is provided.

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