cursor_to_project_start

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

The description accurately describes the behavior: moving the cursor to time 0. No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It does not mention any side effects or behavioral nuances, which are minimal for this cursor action.

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, well-structured sentence with no wasted words. It achieves perfect conciseness for the tool's purpose.

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 has no parameters, no output schema, and performs a simple cursor movement, the description provides all necessary information for an agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly.

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?

No parameters exist in the schema, so baseline score is 4. The description adds no additional parameter information, which is appropriate given there are none.

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 verb 'Move the cursor' and the specific target 'start of the project (time 0)'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like cursor_to_track_start or cursor_to_project_end by specifying 'project 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?

Implicitly indicates when to use: to navigate to the project start. While it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, the simplicity and zero parameters make the usage self-evident. Could be improved by noting other cursor movement tools for different positions.

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