current_timeline

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits such as side effects, error conditions, or state dependencies. It only lists returned data without addressing safety, idempotency, or potential failures (e.g., if no timeline is open). This is a significant gap.

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, concise sentence that directly states the tool's output. It is efficient but could be slightly clearer with a verb. No redundant information.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description should provide more contextual completeness, such as return format, possible values, or error cases. It only lists three attributes without elaboration, making it incomplete for an agent's full understanding.

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 no additional parameter explanation is needed. The description does not need to add meaning beyond the schema, which already shows no parameters. Baseline score of 4 is appropriate.

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 indicates that the tool provides the current timeline's name, frame range, and track counts. It distinguishes from siblings like 'set_current_timeline' by implying a retrieval function, though it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'retrieve'.

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 like 'get_timeline_setting' or 'get_track_count'. The description does not mention prerequisites (e.g., a timeline must be active) or exclude specific use cases.

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