event_timeline_cursor

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It states the action and parameter constraint (position >= 0), but does not mention side effects, such as whether scrubbing stops playback, if it's reversible, or if there are any restrictions on target format beyond the path/GUID. Lacks depth for a mutating operation.

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?

Two sentences with no fluff. Every word adds value. It's efficiently structured.

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?

For a tool with two simple parameters, the description covers the core action and parameters. However, it lacks guidance on typical usage context or potential effects on playback state, leaving some ambiguity for agents.

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 description adds crucial information beyond the schema: target is specified as 'event:// path or {guid}' and position is 'Cursor position in seconds (>= 0)'. This clarifies the format and constraints, compensating for the 0% schema coverage.

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 the specific verb 'Scrub' and identifies the resource as 'event's timeline cursor' to a position in seconds. This clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like event_play, event_stop, which control playback, and other event operations.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It simply states the action and arguments, but there is no mention of scenarios where this is preferable or alternatives. The requirement of a position in seconds is implied but no exclusions or alternatives are given.

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