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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds the useful fact that the response includes the latest shot and choices, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as error cases, freshness guarantees, or whether a missing runId yields an error.

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 a single clear sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, then adds one useful qualifier about the returned content. Every word earns its place.

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 simple, read-only getter with one well-documented parameter, a rich output schema, and annotations covering side effects, the description is complete. The agent has enough information to call the tool correctly without further explanation.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the runId parameter is already described as coming from start_last_frame. The description does not add parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

"Get a Last Frame run" names a specific verb and resource, and "including the latest shot and choices" clarifies what the run object contains. This is clearly distinct from other getters like get_clip or get_storyboard, and the Last Frame domain is reinforced by siblings such as start_last_frame.

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?

Usage is implied: the agent should call this after starting a Last Frame run, using a runId from start_last_frame. However, the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and names no alternative tools, so it does not fully help the agent route between the many get_* siblings.

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