create_frame

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

Annotations indicate non-read-only and non-destructive mutations, which the description aligns with by stating 'Create a frame'. The description adds context about auto-layout being exclusive to frames and the need to enable it separately. Some behavioral details like error conditions are omitted, but overall transparent.

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 two sentences, front-loading the core purpose and key distinctions. Every sentence adds value: first explains what a frame is and its defaults, second provides usage guidance and return shape. No wasted words.

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 6-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the return type and provides usage context. It lacks details on error handling or invalid parameters, but given the context signals and sibling tools, it is mostly complete for a human or AI agent.

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 67%, and the description adds only generic hints like 'optionally sized/positioned' without detailing each parameter. It does not significantly enhance the schema's descriptions, so a baseline score of 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 clearly states 'Create a frame' with specific verb and resource, and distinguishes it from siblings by noting it is 'the primary container for UI and the only node that hosts auto-layout'. It also contrasts with 'create_section' for canvas-level grouping.

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 explicitly advises to use 'set_auto_layout' afterwards for auto-layout and suggests 'create_section' for a different use case (canvas-level grouping). It also explains default parent behavior, providing clear when-to-use guidance.

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