measure_frames

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it says nothing about read-only status, side effects, return format, or requirements. It only describes the subject matter, not the tool's behavior.

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 single sentence is concise and contains no filler, but it is a sentence fragment rather than a front-loaded tool description. It is appropriately sized for a no-param tool, yet could be clearer.

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?

No output schema, annotations, or parameters exist, so the description must fully explain purpose and results. It leaves the agent unsure what 'measure_frames' actually returns or how it relates to sibling measurement tools, making it incomplete.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 per the rubric. The description adds no parameter semantics, but none are needed.

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 is a noun phrase describing a phenomenon ('How a moving element behaves over time') rather than stating a measurement action. It hints at slider/animation context but never says the tool measures or returns frames, so the agent must infer the verb from the name.

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?

It provides only a context ('for a slider or an animation') and no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives. Sibling tools like measure_gap and measure_rotation are not mentioned, so the agent gets no routing help.

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