set_frame

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states that it sets the current frame, implying a state change, but gives no details on side effects, return values, error conditions, or whether it affects playback or rendering. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 a single, succinct sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource. However, it is so brief that it borders on under-specification, which slightly reduces the score.

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?

Even with an output schema present, the tool is simple, and the description fails to explain the input parameter or any behavioral nuances. An agent cannot correctly call this tool without knowing what 'frame' expects. The description is incomplete for a low-complexity tool.

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 schema has a single parameter 'frame' with no description (schema coverage 0%). The description does not explain what the frame parameter expects (e.g., integer index, timestamp, or frame range). There is no information about format, units, or acceptable values, leaving the agent to guess.

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 action (set) and the resource (current frame of the scene). It is specific enough to be understood without ambiguity, and it is distinguishable from siblings like set_frame_range (which targets a range) and insert_keyframe (which adds keyframes). However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from these siblings, so it falls 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?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention context, prerequisites, or when it would be preferable over set_frame_range or insert_keyframe. The only information is what it does, not when to use it.

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