playback_control

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only lists action names without explaining their side effects, such as whether PAUSE preserves the current frame or whether STOP resets playback position. This lack of detail is a significant gap for a control command.

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, front-loaded sentence, with no wasted words. It immediately conveys the tool's function and the distinct actions, achieving maximum clarity in minimal space.

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 one parameter and an output schema (not shown), the description adequately covers the primary purpose. However, it lacks details about behavioral effects (e.g., does STOP rewind to frame 0?) and any prerequisites like a loaded scene. The presence of output schema reduces the need to describe return values, but the state-changing effects are still unexplained.

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 one required 'action' parameter with zero description coverage and no enum. The description compensates by enumerating the likely valid values (PLAY, PAUSE, STOP), adding crucial meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 tool controls animation playback and explicitly lists the actions PLAY, PAUSE, STOP. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_frame or set_playback_range, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 usage for controlling animation playback without giving explicit when-to-use vs alternatives. It provides clear context by naming the three actions, but does not mention when to prefer this over related tools like clear_animation or set_playback_range.

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