add_frame

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the new frame becomes active and can duplicate an existing one, but does not specify where the frame is appended (e.g., after the current frame), effects on undo history, or any side effects. Adequate but lacks detail.

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?

Two concise sentences: the first states the action, the second the behavioral effect. No extraneous information, each sentence earns its place.

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 has 3 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description covers core behavior but omits details like append position, prerequisites (e.g., active document), and error conditions. Adequate for a simple append but not fully complete.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema: it explains that duplicate_from is for optional duplication and that the new frame becomes active. The schema already describes duration_ms well (67% coverage), and the description complements it. However, duplicate_from lacks a schema description, so the description partially compensates.

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 'Append a frame', specifying the verb (append) and resource (frame). It also mentions optional duplication and that the new frame becomes active, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like remove_frame, reorder_frame, or set_frame_duration.

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 implies usage for adding a new frame but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like copy_cel or remove_frame. No when-not guidance or exclusion criteria are provided.

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