export_frame

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It states the primary side effect (writing an image file to outputPath) but does not disclose whether it overwrites existing files, requires specific permissions, or has any restrictions. Mutation behavior (file creation) is implied but not elaborated.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. Every word contributes to the meaning.

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 description plus schema provides enough to invoke the tool correctly, but it lacks usage alternatives and behavioral side-effect details. Without annotations or an output schema, the description is minimal and doesn't fully contextualize the tool within a larger workflow.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides; for example, it doesn't clarify the default format or how time is handled beyond 'seconds'. The schema already documents each parameter adequately.

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 uses a specific verb ('Exports') and resource ('a single frame from a sequence') with a clear outcome ('as an image file'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like export_sequence (whole sequence) and capture_frame (likely different capture semantics).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention trade-offs, prerequisites, or when not to use it. The context is only implied by the purpose description.

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