get_selected_track

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states it gets the index but does not disclose behavior when no track is selected (e.g., returns -1 or null) or whether the tool is read-only. This omission limits transparency.

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 sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the core action. No wasteful words.

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's simplicity and presence of an output schema (though not displayed), the description is mostly adequate but lacks mention of the return type (index as integer) or edge cases. It could be more complete.

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, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no extra semantic value about parameters, but the baseline is 4 for zero-parameter tools since the schema trivially covers all.

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 tool's action ('get') and resource ('index of the currently selected track'), which is a specific verb+resource. It implicitly distinguishes from siblings like set_selected_track (which sets) and get_track_names (which lists names).

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. With many sibling tools (e.g., get_track_names, get_selected_scene, get_track_info), it fails to mention that this is for retrieving the index, not other track properties.

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