ruyi_list_frames

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the output scope and that it includes nested frames, and 'list' implies read-only. However, it does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, nor does it clarify how 'current page' interacts with the pageIdx parameter, leaving ambiguity about which page is actually inspected.

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 concise sentence in Chinese that packs the key information: scope (current page), inclusion of nested frames, and specific return fields. Every element earns its place, with no fluff or redundancy.

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 list operation with no output schema, the description covers the main behavioral aspects. However, it leaves the relationship between 'current page' and pageIdx ambiguous, and it does not mention that the returned contextId is useful for subsequent operations like select_frame. These are notable gaps for a complete understanding.

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% as pageIdx has a description ('标签页索引'). The tool description does not add extra semantics beyond the schema; it refers to 'current page' without tying it to the pageIdx parameter, which could confuse whether pageIdx overrides 'current' or selects which page's frames to list. The baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema already documents the parameter.

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 tool lists all iframes/frames in the current page, including nested ones, and specifically enumerates the returned fields (contextId, url, isCrossOrigin). This is a specific verb+resource combination and distinguishes it from sibling tools like select_frame or list_pages by focusing on frame enumeration.

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 implies usage for inspecting all frames in the current page, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like ruyi_select_frame, nor does it exclude cases where other tools are more appropriate. There is no 'use when' or 'instead of' guidance, so the usage context is only implied.

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