timeline_set_frame

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say whether the frame must be within the range, whether playback state is affected, or what 'move' implies for scene/cursor state, which matters given destructiveHint=true on an operation that reads like navigation.

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 short sentence with the action front-loaded and no filler. It is appropriately terse, though the terseness shades into under-specification rather than economy.

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 (one required integer parameter, no output schema), but a destructiveHint=true mutation with an entirely undocumented parameter needs more than one sentence. An agent still cannot tell valid frame bounds, side effects on playback, or what makes this destructive.

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 single 'frame' parameter has no documented meaning in either place. The description only implies the frame must be 'existing'; it gives no indication of indexing base, allowed range relative to timeline_set_range, or behavior for out-of-range values, so the schema gap is not compensated.

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?

"Move to an existing animation frame" identifies the resource (a frame) and an action (move/seek), so an agent can infer this sets the current playhead position. But the verb is loose and it does not distinguish itself from siblings like timeline_set_range or timeline_get, which also operate on the timeline.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance at all: nothing says to call this before reading keys, before playback, or instead of timeline_set_range. The word "existing" is the only hint that the frame must already be inside the timeline range, and that is left implicit.

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