playback_get_current_item

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses the return type (dict with keys name, start, end, duration) and the edge case (returns None when no item or no open timeline). This gives the agent concrete behavioral expectations.

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?

Two concise sentences deliver the purpose and return details without waste. The first sentence front-loads the action, and the second adds the return shape and edge-case behavior.

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 parameterless, read-only tool, the description fully explains what it returns (dict with four keys), the None condition, and the absence of parameters. The context signals confirm simplicity, and nothing is missing.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the empty input schema fully covers parameter semantics. The description adds no parameter information because none is needed; baseline 4 applies for parameterless tools.

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 'Return info about the timeline item under the playhead', clearly identifying the action (return info) and specific resource (timeline item under playhead). This distinguishes it from siblings like playback_get_timecode or item_get_name, which target different resources.

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 clear context for when to use: to get info about the current timeline item. It also notes the None condition when no item is under the playhead or no timeline is open. No explicit alternatives are named, but the scope is well-defined.

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