Cycle active media source

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It transparently mentions the state-changing cycle, optional playback transfer, before/after status evidence, and dry-run support. It does not detail failure behavior or reversibility, but the key traits are covered.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action and integrates optional behaviors and safeguards without redundancy or wasted words.

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 tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the purpose, parameters, and key behavioral traits. It could be more explicit about what 'transferring playback' entails, but overall it provides everything needed for an agent to invoke 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 description maps 'direction' to 'forward/backward' and explicitly mentions 'dry-run', giving both parameters meaning that the schema (0% coverage) lacks. This compensates for the absence of schema descriptions and clarifies the parameter's purpose.

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 'Cycle' and resource 'active local MPRIS media source' with direction 'forward/backward', making its function unmistakable. It also includes the distinctive trait of providing 'before/after shell status evidence', which sets it apart from any sibling tool.

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?

It clearly implies usage context by specifying 'active local MPRIS media source', indicating when the tool is applicable. It does not name alternative tools, but no sibling performs media source cycling, so this is acceptable. It could explicitly state exclusions (e.g., when no MPRIS source is active), but the context is sufficient.

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