set_frame

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Set the current frame' with no mention of side effects, return behavior, or whether this changes playback/cooking state. This is below the minimum viable level for an unannotated mutation tool.

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 short, front-loaded with the main action, and has a clean Args section for the parameter. It contains no wasted words, though it might be considered under-specified rather than genuinely concise.

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 single-parameter setter with no output schema, the description provides a minimal but recognizable invocation path: supply a frame number. However, because there are no annotations or behavioral details, an agent still lacks enough context about side effects or expected return value, leaving mild gaps.

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%, and the description's 'frame: Frame number' adds no meaning beyond the schema's type:'number' and title:'Frame'. It does not clarify expected range, integer vs float, or what frame numbering convention applies.

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 identifies the action ('Set the current frame') and the resource ('in the timeline'), so an agent can understand what the tool does. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from related siblings like get_frame or set_frame_range, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as set_frame_range, set_playback_range, or playbar_control. The description only states what it does, but offers no when/when-not or alternative-routing information.

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