toggle_cue_point

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It ambiguously says 'create or delete' without explaining the toggle logic or any side effects. Does not disclose what happens if a cue point already exists at the playhead position.

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 sentence that front-loads the purpose. It is concise but could be slightly tighter by using 'Toggle cue point at playhead' instead of 'Create or delete'.

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?

Despite low complexity, the description lacks details on return values, exact behavior (toggle vs explicit create/delete), and does not reference sibling tools. No output schema forces description to explain outcomes, which it fails to do.

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 is 'ctx' (Context), which is standard and likely automatically provided. The description does not mention it or explain its purpose. Schema coverage is 0%, and the description adds no value for parameter semantics.

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 ('Create or delete') and the resource ('a cue point at the current playhead position'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'jump_to_cue_point' (navigation) and 'list_cue_points' (listing).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not mention whether it toggles based on existing cue points, prerequisites like playback state, or when to expect creation vs deletion.

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