play_sequence

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Start playing' implies a state mutation, but nothing is said about whether playback blocks the editor, whether it must be stopped manually with stop_sequence, what editor mode is required, or what side effects occur. An output schema exists, so return values are partly covered, but the interaction behavior is undisclosed.

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?

Front-loaded and free of padding; the core purpose is in the first sentence. The trailing 'Args: name: Sequence name.' largely restates the schema but is brief enough not to hurt.

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 single-parameter playback trigger with an output schema, the description covers the minimum. It is missing the lifecycle context that matters here: how playback ends, whether stop_sequence is required, and any preconditions on the named sequence.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds only that the 'name' is a sequence name, which mildly exceeds the schema's bare 'Name' string, but gives no identifier format, lookup rules, or whether it must match an existing sequence.

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: 'Start playing a Track View sequence in the editor.' An agent can tell what it does, and the sibling set (stop_sequence, list_sequences, create_sequence) makes the play action distinguishable. It does not explicitly contrast itself with stop_sequence or get_sequence, so it stops short of a 5.

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 when-to-use guidance and no alternatives named. It does not say to use stop_sequence to halt playback, nor whether the sequence must already exist or be loaded. Usage is only weakly implied by the verb 'play'.

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