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 endpoint 'POST /v3/frame_details' and id provenance, but does not describe return behavior, authentication needs, or rate limits.

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 very short and front-loaded with the core purpose. The parenthetical provenance and endpoint are compact, and there is no filler or redundant text.

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 one-parameter read-only getter with full schema coverage and clear annotations, the description provides enough context to select and invoke the tool correctly. It could say more about what frame details are returned, but that is a minor gap for this complexity level.

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%, so the id parameter itself is fully documented by the schema. The description adds useful meaning by indicating that the id comes from finerworks_list_frame_collections, guiding the agent on how to obtain a valid value.

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 resource and access pattern: one frame retrieved by id. It also identifies finerworks_list_frame_collections as the source of the id, which helps distinguish it from list-style siblings, though it does not explicitly contrast with all other get_* tools.

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 parenthetical '(from finerworks_list_frame_collections)' implies the intended workflow: call the list tool first, then fetch details using one of its ids. However, it does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites.

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