add_frame

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action 'Add a new frame' without explaining side effects (e.g., whether the file is saved, if frames are appended, any permission requirements). This is insufficient for an agent to anticipate consequences.

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 very concise (two lines) and front-loaded with the core action. However, it lacks structure such as a separate 'Args' section; the current format is minimal but acceptable for a simple tool.

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 simplicity, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the operation's effect on the animation timeline (e.g., appending a frame, total frame count), nor does it mention return values or error conditions. An output schema is absent, increasing the burden on the description.

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 provides only the type and title for the single parameter 'filename,' with 0% coverage of its meaning. The description adds brief context ('Name of the Aseprite file to modify'), which partially compensates but offers no details about expected format, file existence, or defaults.

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 verb 'Add' and the resource 'a new frame to the Aseprite file,' making the tool's purpose clear. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling tool 'add_frames,' though the singular 'frame' implies a single frame addition.

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 (e.g., 'add_frames'), nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The description lacks context about the typical workflow or file state needed.

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