create_text_frame

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It doesn't state whether this creates a new frame on the current page, whether it replaces existing content, what happens with default values, or whether it requires an open document. 'Advanced formatting options' hints at capabilities but doesn't disclose side effects or requirements.

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 that is front-loaded with the core action. It's efficient, though 'advanced formatting options' is somewhat generic and could be more specific without adding length.

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?

With 13 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too thin. It doesn't explain the tool's role in the document workflow, whether it requires an active document, how it relates to text frame selection, or what the return value is. The schema covers parameters but the description fails to provide the operational context an agent needs.

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 92%, so the schema already documents most parameters well. The description adds the phrase 'advanced formatting options' which hints at the formatting parameters (fontSize, alignment, fontStyle, textColor, fontFamily, characterStyle, paragraphStyle) but doesn't add specific meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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?

The description states a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('text frame') and mentions 'advanced formatting options', which distinguishes it from simpler creation tools. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like edit_text_frame or insert_markdown_text, and 'advanced formatting options' is vague about what those options are.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like insert_markdown_text, edit_text_frame, or create_rectangle. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., an open document) or context for when this is the right choice. The agent must infer usage from the name and schema.

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