move_playhead_to_edit

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It reveals no details about the operation's behavior—such as direction of movement, whether it navigates to the next/previous edit point, or any side effects—offering only a tautological statement that adds no transparency.

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 extremely short ('Premiere Pro expanded operation: move playhead to edit.'), but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It lacks structure and essential details, making the brevity counterproductive—there is no meaningful content to front-load.

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?

The tool is simple (no parameters, no output schema), but the description is too vague to be complete. The ambiguity around 'edit' is a significant gap, and the lack of annotations or additional context leaves the agent without enough information to use it correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the input schema is empty with 100% coverage. The baseline for no parameters is 4, and there is nothing for the description to add about parameter meaning. The description is neutral here, neither adding nor detracting from parameter clarity.

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 directly restates the tool name ('move playhead to edit') without adding any specificity. It fails to clarify what 'edit' refers to (e.g., next edit, previous edit, or a specific edit point), and does not distinguish it from related timeline navigation tools like get_next_edit_point or set_playhead_position.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description provides no context about intended scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess when 'move playhead to edit' is appropriate among many sibling tools.

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