cursor_to_project_end

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

With no annotations, the description adequately states that the cursor moves to the end of the project. It does not mention side effects (e.g., stopping playback), but for a cursor movement, the description is sufficient and no contradictions.

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?

Single sentence with 11 words, no redundancy, front-loaded with action and target. Every word 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?

Given no parameters, no output schema, and low complexity, the description is complete. It tells the agent exactly what the tool does without missing information.

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 and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter info, which is appropriate. Baseline score of 4 for 0-parameter tools.

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 uses a specific verb 'Move' and identifies the resource 'cursor to end of project' with clarification 'last audio'. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like cursor_to_track_end (track level) and cursor_to_project_start (start).

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 implies use when the cursor should be positioned at the project's end, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like cursor_set_position. For a simple command, this is acceptable but lacks explicit guidance.

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