list_sequences

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'List' implies a read-only operation and the return structure with time units in seconds is disclosed, which is useful. However, nothing is said about permissions, whether a level must be loaded, or pagination/limits for large sequence sets.

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 tight sentences with the core purpose front-loaded. The second sentence describing return shape is partly redundant given an output schema exists, but it does add the non-obvious detail that time ranges are in seconds, which 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-argument read tool with an output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, scope, and the key unit semantics. The only meaningful gap is the absence of any prerequisite state (e.g., a level must be loaded) or guidance versus the single-sequence get_sequence sibling.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to disambiguate, and it correctly does not pad with meaningless argument prose.

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?

States a specific verb and resource with domain qualifier and scope: 'List the Track View cinematic sequences in the current level.' An agent can distinguish this from list_levels, list_entities, or get_sequence. It stops short of explicitly naming which sibling to use instead, so it is clear but not sibling-routing.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no alternative named (get_sequence for a single sequence, create_sequence for mutation). The phrase 'in the current level' implicitly scopes the call to an open level, which is the only usage signal present.

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