duplicate_frame_range

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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavior. It states duplication and appending but does not disclose side effects (e.g., does original range remain unchanged? Are existing frames shifted? No mention of error handling or mutability.

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?

Extremely concise: one-line summary then bulleted args. Each sentence is necessary and front-loaded with the action.

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 tool with 4 params and no output schema, it explains the operation and all parameters. Could mention effect on timeline (e.g., total frames count increases) or error conditions, but generally adequate.

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 0%, but description fully documents each parameter: filename, start_frame (1-based), end_frame (1-based inclusive), times (default 1). Adds essential meaning beyond schema types.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'duplicate' and resource 'frame range', with specifics about appending copies. Distinguishes from siblings like copy_frame (single frame) and add_frame (empty frame).

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use, nor alternatives. However, the purpose is clear enough for an agent to infer typical use cases; lacks exclusions.

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