capture_current_frame

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It states 'export' but does not disclose side effects like file creation location, overwrite behavior (despite an overwrite parameter), or any modification to the timeline. The output schema exists but the description does not clarify return format or behavioral traits.

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?

A single sentence conveying the entire purpose. No wasted words; front-loaded and efficient.

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 tool has four parameters and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It omits why parameters exist, what outputs are returned (though output schema exists), and prerequisites like a valid timeline. It leaves many gaps for the agent to infer.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no explanation for any of the four parameters (overwrite, output_name, output_format, include_metadata). The tool name and brief description provide no semantics beyond parameter names.

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 'Export the current Resolve timeline frame and matching JSON metadata' clearly states the verb (export), the specific resource (current timeline frame), and the accompanying metadata. It distinguishes from sibling tools like capture_clip_reference and capture_before_after_reference by focusing on frame export with metadata.

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 sibling capture tools, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. It does not mention context such as requiring an open timeline or which scenarios favor this over other capture tools.

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