set_playhead_position

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action and does not mention side effects, prerequisites (e.g., sequence open/active), whether playback is affected, or failure modes. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 a single, concise sentence that is appropriately front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word earns its place, and there is no extraneous information.

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, but with no annotations and no output schema, the description should provide more context about the operation's effects and requirements. It mentions 'specified sequence' but does not clarify if the sequence must be active or open, nor does it indicate the result. It is minimally adequate but has clear gaps.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters (time in seconds, sequence ID). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so this is at the baseline of 3.

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 'Sets the playhead (CTI) position in the specified sequence' clearly states the verb (sets) and resource (playhead/CTI position) and scope (in the specified sequence). It is specific but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like move_playhead_to_edit or get_playhead_position, so it loses a point for no sibling differentiation.

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 implies the tool is for setting the playhead to a given time in a sequence, but it does not provide explicit when-to-use vs alternatives or any exclusion conditions. This is acceptable as an implied usage but lacks clear guidance.

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