daz_frame_shot

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

The description details the calculation of camera distance and height, placement relative to the subject, and lists all shot types with distances. It lacks details on prerequisites (e.g., subject must be a Genesis figure) or error conditions, but core behavior is well explained.

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 well-structured with sections for args and returns, front-loaded purpose, but is somewhat verbose. Each sentence adds value.

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 the tool's complexity (3 parameters, no annotations, but has output schema), the description provides thorough parameter details and output format. It could mention if the camera must already exist or error handling.

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 the description adds comprehensive meaning for all parameters: camera_label and subject_label are clearly defined, and shot_type is explained with a full list of options and their distances.

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 frames a camera to a subject using cinematic shot types, with specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling camera tools like daz_look_at_character or daz_orbit_camera_around.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It describes what it does but not the context or prerequisites for usage.

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