list_frames

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It indicates this is a read-only listing operation, which is safe, but lacks details on potential side effects, error cases, or behavior with large sprites. The mention of durations gives some behavioral context but not exhaustive.

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 one sentence of seven words, fully front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word is meaningful with no redundancy.

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 low complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description suffices for basic usage. It clarifies that durations are included, which is helpful. A slight gap is the lack of mention of return format or ordering, but overall acceptable.

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 100% with a single parameter described as 'Sprite file'. The description adds the phrase 'in a sprite' which is consistent but does not add new meaning beyond the schema. As coverage is high, baseline 3 applies.

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 the tool's purpose: 'List all frames in a sprite with durations'. The verb 'list' specifies the action, the resource 'frames' is precise, and the scope 'in a sprite with durations' distinguishes it from frame manipulation tools like add_frame or remove_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?

The description implies when to use (when you need to see all frames and their durations) but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. No comparison with sibling tools like get_sprite_info or list_layers is given.

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