goto_position

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Move cursor' implies a navigation action, it doesn't specify whether this affects playback state, requires specific permissions, has side effects on other session elements, or what happens if the position is invalid. The description lacks crucial behavioral context for a navigation tool.

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 perfectly concise with zero wasted words. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the Args section cleanly documents the parameter. Every element serves a clear purpose without redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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 simple single-parameter input schema and existence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description covers the basics adequately. However, as a navigation tool with no annotations, it should ideally mention behavioral aspects like whether this pauses playback or affects other session states to be fully 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds essential meaning by explaining that 'seconds' represents 'Position in seconds'. This clarifies the parameter's purpose beyond the schema's generic 'number' type. However, it doesn't provide additional context like valid ranges, units beyond seconds, or how the position relates to session timeline.

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 cursor') and resource ('to a specific position'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like play, stop, or set_tempo by focusing on cursor positioning rather than playback or session settings. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from tools like select_track that might involve positioning indirectly.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, timing considerations, or how it relates to other positioning or playback tools like play or stop. Without any usage context, the agent must infer appropriate scenarios from the tool name alone.

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