Capture Eden Frame Sequence

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description complements this by explaining the temporal capture behavior and the classification output, which goes beyond the annotation. It doesn't contradict the readonly hint, and adds context that this involves multiple frames over time, not a single operation.

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 sentence that efficiently packs the core action, parameters range, and output types without redundancy. Every phrase contributes meaning, and there is no filler or unnecessary detail.

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 no output schema and 5 optional parameters with zero descriptions, the description provides a good high-level summary but omits return format specifics and does not clarify the meaning of threshold, session_id, or include_images. It covers the main purpose and output categories, but leaves room for ambiguity.

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%, so the description must compensate. It only vaguely references count and interval via '2-12 frames over time', leaving threshold, session_id, and include_images completely unexplained. This is a clear gap for agents to use the tool effectively.

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 specifies the action (capture 2-12 native frames over time) and the analytical outputs (perceptual differences, sampled frame hashes, classification), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like eden_take_screenshot. The verb 'capture' plus the resource 'frames' and scope make the purpose unmistakable.

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 clear context for use ('for visual loop evidence') which directly implies when to use this tool. It does not explicitly list alternative tools or exclusions, but the purpose statement is specific enough to guide selection. A bit more direct comparison to eden_take_screenshot would earn a 5.

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