jump_to_locator

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the basic action (jump playback) but omits details like whether playback starts, what happens if the locator doesn't exist, or if it modifies state beyond cursor position.

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?

Single sentence with no superfluous words. The verb is front-loaded, making it easy to scan.

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?

While an output schema exists (handling return), the description misses context on error handling, prerequisites, and whether the tool starts playback. It is minimally complete but sufficient for a simple action.

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%, but description does not elaborate on the 'name' parameter beyond referring to it as 'named locator/marker'. Lacks format, case sensitivity, or relationship to 'add_locator'.

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 playback position') and the target ('named locator/marker'), using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'add_locator' and 'list_locators'.

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 use when a locator already exists, but no explicit guidance on when to use or avoid this tool vs alternatives, nor any prerequisites or fallback behavior discussed.

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