etabs_assign_frame_load

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

Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and the description aligns by explaining load assignment and replacement behavior. No contradictions.

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 well-structured with a summary followed by parameter details. It is slightly lengthy but every sentence adds value.

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?

Despite 10 parameters and absence of nested objects, the description explains all parameters and mentions the return type ('Confirmation'). The output schema exists, so completeness is high.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description adds essential meaning for all 10 parameters, including direction codes, distance semantics, and boolean flags, fully compensating for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 the tool assigns a uniform or trapezoidal distributed load to a frame object. It distinguishes from sibling tools like etabs_assign_area_load and etabs_assign_point_load by specifying 'frame object'.

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 explains how to set uniform vs trapezoidal loads (w1=w2 for uniform) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. However, the tool name and specificity make usage clear.

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