delete_frame

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the key safety invariant (the sprite will retain at least one frame), but it does not state whether the operation is irreversible, how frame indices shift after deletion, or what happens if the caller attempts to delete the last frame.

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 sentence with no filler; the core action is front-loaded and the constraint is appended efficiently. It earns its place without redundant detail.

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 two-parameter delete operation, the description covers the basic purpose and a safety invariant. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the agent is left without guidance on error behavior, whether the deletion is irreversible, and what happens to the remaining frames' indices.

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 adds no parameter-level meaning. The names filename and frame_index are self-explanatory, but the description does not clarify indexing conventions (e.g., whether frame_index is 1-based) or what values are valid beyond the schema bounds.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Delete one animation frame' from a sprite. It also adds a unique invariant, 'keeping at least one frame,' which helps distinguish it from sibling frame operations. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as add_frame or delete_tag, so it misses a 5.

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 intended use is implied by the action: call this when a single animation frame must be removed while preserving at least one frame. However, the description gives no explicit guidance about when not to use it, nor any mention of alternatives like copy_frame, clear_cel, or set_frame for adjusting frames.

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