animation_getFrameState

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, and 'full animation state' gives some sense of scope. However, it doesn't detail the return format, potential edge cases, or whether any side effects occur.

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, concise sentence that includes the key elements: action, target, and temporal scope. It contains no filler or redundant information.

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 with only two parameters, and the schema covers them well. However, there is no output schema, and the description does not clarify what 'full animation state' includes or what the response looks like, leaving some contextual ambiguity.

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?

The input schema covers both parameters (frame and layerId) with clear descriptions, so the schema already provides full parameter semantics. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema states, warranting the baseline score of 3.

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 action ('Get') and the resource ('full animation state of a layer at a specific frame'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool animation_getKeyframes by focusing on the state at a specific frame rather than keyframes themselves.

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 usage context is implied by the wording 'at a specific frame', suggesting this is for inspecting the resulting state at one frame. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to prefer this over animation_getKeyframes or provide any exclusions or alternatives.

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