get_sequence_in_out_points

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the description's job is light. It adds the context of operating on the 'current sequence', but does not explain behavior when no sequence is open or what the return format is. Adequate but not exceptional.

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 sentence that is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words. Every word earns its place.

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 zero-parameter tool with extensive annotations, the description is sufficient. It tells what the tool does, though it could optionally mention what is returned (e.g., timecodes) to be fully self-contained. Still, it is complete enough for an agent to understand the tool's basic purpose.

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?

There are no parameters, so the description cannot add meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 4 is appropriate; no additional documentation needed.

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 retrieves the current sequence's in and out points. The verb 'get' and resource 'sequence in and out points' are specific, distinguishing it from siblings like set_sequence_in_out_points and clear_sequence_in_out.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as set_sequence_in_out_points or clear_sequence_in_out. An agent must infer from the name and description alone, with no explicit usage context.

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