jump_to_time

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavior disclosure. It does not state whether playback is started/stopped, whether the move is immediate, or any other side effects. The agent is left to infer what 'jump' entails.

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 concise: one sentence of purpose and one bullet for the parameter. It is front-loaded and contains no filler, earning every character.

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 one-parameter tool, the description is minimally viable. It explains the parameter fully, but lacks context on any side effects or prerequisites. Given no annotations or output schema, a bit more detail on behavior would make it complete, but it is adequate for basic selection.

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 schema has zero description coverage for parameter 'time', but the description compensates by explaining 'Position in beats to jump to'. This adds the crucial semantics of unit (beats) and meaning, far beyond the bare schema's type number.

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 clearly states the action: 'Jump to a specific time in the arrangement.' This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_playback_position or start_playback, which serve different purposes.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any prerequisites, edge cases, or contexts where another tool (e.g., set_arrangement_loop, start_playback) would be more appropriate.

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