offset_media_input_cursor

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the important behavioral caveat 'No bounds checking.' However, it does not describe what happens on an out-of-bounds offset, whether errors can occur, or what the return behavior is.

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 compact and front-loaded with the purpose, followed by the key 'No bounds checking' caveat and a minimal parameter list. Every sentence adds value with no redundant content.

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 two-parameter seek operation, the description provides the core semantics and a caveat, but it omits details about return values/error behavior and does not explicitly situate this against the absolute-position sibling. This leaves minor but real gaps for an agent deciding how to use and handle failures.

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 compensates for the 0% schema coverage by explaining both parameters: input_name identifies the media input, and offset_ms is in milliseconds with negative values seeking backward. This adds semantic meaning beyond the bare integer/string schema fields.

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 a specific verb ('Seek'), a resource ('media source'), and the key differentiator ('relative to its current position'). This distinguishes it from the sibling tool set_media_input_cursor, which implies absolute positioning.

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 'relative to its current position' phrasing gives clear context for when to use this tool, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or reference the alternative absolute-seek sibling. The guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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