seek

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states the action but not side effects (e.g., does playing start? does it pause?), reversibility, or error behavior for out-of-range positions. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.

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?

A single, clear sentence conveys the core function without waste. The structure is minimal and effective.

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?

The description is minimal and leaves out important context: what happens if the position is out of bounds, whether seeking is instant or requires media loaded, whether it triggers playback or pauses, and what the return value or error cases are. For a simple tool, these gaps are notable given the lack of annotations and output schema.

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 schema documents the parameter with a clear description ('Playhead position in seconds'). The tool description repeats this, adding no extra value. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema covers it fully, but no additional context is provided.

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 states the action ('seek') and the target resource ('playhead') with a specific parameter ('time in seconds'). It is distinct from sibling tools like get_playhead (retrieves position) and play/pause (state control), though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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 gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or exclusions. However, the purpose is self-evident (moving the playhead to a specific time), and the distinction from siblings is implicit. There is no mention of prerequisites like being in a playing state or valid position ranges.

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