frame_selection

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It never states what happens if nothing is selected, whether the viewport change is undoable, whether it affects only the active pane, or what the null pane_name default means. Only the literal action is disclosed.

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?

One action sentence plus a terse Args block, front-loaded with the action. Efficient, though the Args formatting adds no substance beyond the schema.

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?

A viewport-mutating tool with no annotations, no output schema, and one undocumented optional parameter. The description omits the preconditions and defaults an agent would need to invoke it reliably.

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?

One parameter at 0% schema description coverage. 'Pane tab name' merely restates the schema's title, and the description does not explain the nullable/default behavior (presumably the current pane when omitted). It fails to compensate 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?

States a specific verb and resource: it frames the current selection in the viewport. This implicitly distinguishes it from frame_all, but the sibling is never named, so the agent must infer the boundary itself.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g. that a selection must exist), and no mention of the obvious alternative frame_all. The agent gets no routing help.

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