frame_selection

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without clarifying side effects, prerequisites (e.g., whether a selection must exist), or what happens in the viewport. The description does not contradict annotations (none exist), but it is too terse to be transparent.

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, focused sentence followed by a minimal argument spec. It is front-loaded and contains no fluff, earning high marks for conciseness and structure.

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 viewport action, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what 'frame' does, whether it changes the camera, whether a selection is required, or the effect of omitting pane_name. The lack of output schema and annotations means the description alone must cover these details, and it does not.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides a basic label for pane_name ('Pane tab name') but does not explain its role, valid values, or default behavior when omitted. This adds minimal meaning beyond the schema's type definition, falling short of full compensation for the coverage gap.

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 states a specific verb (frame), resource (current selection), and location (viewport). It clearly distinguishes from frame_all by specifying it operates on the current selection, so an agent can tell them apart.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like frame_all or other viewport controls. The description does not mention exclusions or conditions under which this should be preferred, leaving the agent to infer from the name alone.

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