backward

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the description needed to add context such as what happens at frame 0 (clamp vs. wrap) or whether it affects movie playback. It supplies none of this; the single sentence adds nothing beyond the name and annotations.

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?

One short front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is not padded, though its brevity reflects under-specification rather than disciplined economy.

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?

An output schema exists and there are no parameters, so the return value and call signature are covered elsewhere. What remains missing — boundary behavior at the first frame and the relationship to 'forward' — is minor for such a simple navigation command.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics for the description to explain; the schema baseline of 4 applies. Nothing in the description misleadingly implies arguments.

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?

"Goes back one frame" names a specific verb (goes back) and unit (one frame), so an agent can tell it is a frame-stepping navigation command. It does not mention the obvious sibling 'forward' or clarify that 'frame' refers to a movie/state frame, leaving some ambiguity about the domain.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of the counterpart tool 'forward' or of related frame tools (frame, mplay, mset), and no stated preconditions such as a loaded movie or multi-state object. The agent must infer all routing decisions.

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