skylight_get_frame

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the return includes the frame's settings, which is useful, but says nothing about auth requirements, behavior when the frame cannot be resolved, or error conditions. A 3 is appropriate given the annotations carry most of the burden.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no waste. It is arguably too terse for a tool description, but nothing is redundant or poorly ordered.

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 simple read tool with no required parameters, one well-documented parameter, and no output schema, the description covers what is fetched and that settings are included. Minor gaps remain on what 'settings' comprises and failure behavior when no frame is resolved.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single frameId parameter already documents that it defaults to the resolved frame. The description adds no format, id-shape, or lookup guidance beyond the schema, so the 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 names a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('one Skylight frame and its settings'), and the singular 'one frame' implicitly contrasts with the sibling skylight_list_frames. It does not, however, explicitly differentiate itself from update_frame, rename_frame, or list_frames, so it stops short of a 5.

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 statement of when to call this versus skylight_list_frames (to enumerate frames) or the update/rename variants (to mutate one). The only usage hint is implicit in the word 'one'. No prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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