set_frame_range

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 states only that the tool sets a global frame range, but does not disclose side effects, validation behavior, whether start must be less than end, or whether the current frame changes. This is a thin disclosure for a mutating operation.

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 appropriately short, front-loaded with the main purpose, and the Args section is neatly structured. The parameter lines add little semantic value, but structurally the description is clean and easy to scan.

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?

The tool is simple, but without annotations, output schema, or richer parameter documentation, the description should clarify how 'global frame range' relates to playback range, current frame, and sibling setter tools. It does not, leaving gaps in selecting and invoking it correctly.

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 adds only tautological one-line definitions ('start: Start frame' and 'end: End frame'), which barely go beyond the schema's property titles ('Start'/'End'). It omits type constraints, units, ordering expectations, or integer/float guidance.

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 clear action and resource: 'Set the global frame range.' It is specific about what the tool does. However, it does not actively distinguish itself from sibling tools like set_playback_range or set_frame, so it misses the top tier of differentiation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as set_frame, set_playback_range, or cook_frame_range. There is no mention of context, exclusions, or preferred use cases, leaving the agent to infer usage from names alone.

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