set_current_timeline

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool mutates state by changing the current timeline, but does not explain side effects (e.g., what happens to the previous current timeline), reversibility, or required permissions. The short description lacks sufficient transparency for safe invocation.

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 extremely concise (one sentence, 8 words), which makes it easy to read. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool but lacks informational content that would better support the agent's decision-making.

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 tool's simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description should cover prerequisites and return behavior. It does not mention that the timeline must already exist or what the tool returns upon success/failure. This incompleteness could lead to incorrect invocation.

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 only parameter 'name' is implied to be the timeline's name via 'the named timeline', but the description does not add meaning such as valid values, case sensitivity, or that the timeline must exist. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate, but it minimally clarifies the parameter's purpose.

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 ('Make the named timeline the current one') and identifies the resource as a timeline by name. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'current_timeline' (which likely retrieves the current timeline) and 'set_timeline_setting' (which modifies settings). The verb 'make current' is specific enough to convey the intended operation.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool relative to alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., the timeline must exist) or situations where this tool is inappropriate. Among siblings like 'create_timeline' or 'list_timelines', the description offers no context for when to switch vs. create or list timelines.

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