set_render_range

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

The annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds no additional behavioral context, such as whether the previous render range is overwritten or if keyframes are affected. It is consistent with annotations but provides no extra value beyond them.

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 short sentence with no fluff, which is concise. However, it is under-specified—it omits parameter semantics and usage context, making it more minimal than appropriately complete. The brevity does not compensate for the missing information.

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?

The tool is simple with only two integer parameters, but the description does not mention the start/end parameters, any constraints, or the behavior after setting the range. The output schema exists but is not explained. The description is insufficient for an agent to confidently invoke the tool correctly without additional inference.

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?

The input schema defines 'start' and 'end' integers with defaults, but the description does not explain these parameters or their meaning. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description fails to compensate by defining the start/end semantics, leaving the agent to infer them from the tool name.

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 'Atur rentang frame animasi' translates to 'Set animation frame range,' which clearly identifies the verb (set) and resource (render range). It distinguishes from sibling tools like set_frame and set_render_engine by focusing on the frame range. However, it is in Indonesian and does not explicitly mention 'render,' which could reduce clarity for some agents.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that set_frame is for the current frame or that this tool is specifically for the render range, nor does it provide any exclusions or alternative tool references.

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