document_setFrame

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only states 'Navigate' without revealing that this likely changes the current frame in the document (a mutation), nor does it mention possible side effects, frame range validation, or return values. This leaves the agent uncertain about the tool's impact and expectations.

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 that states the action and target without any filler words or unnecessary details. It is appropriately concise for such a simple function.

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?

While the tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, the description omits important contextual details: it does not clarify whether the operation modifies the document state, what happens for out-of-range frames, or if any return value is provided. These gaps make the description incomplete for a fully informed invocation, though the core purpose is clear.

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 schema has 100% coverage for the 'frame' parameter with its own description ('The frame number to navigate to'). The tool description adds no additional semantics beyond the schema, such as whether frame numbering starts at 0 or 1, valid ranges, or whether fractional frames are supported. Thus, it does not elevate understanding beyond the schema baseline.

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 the specific verb 'Navigate' and identifies the resource as 'a specific frame on the MOHO timeline.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling animation tools like animation_setKeyframe or animation_getFrameState, which involve keyframes or state retrieval rather than navigation.

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 implies the tool should be used to jump to a specific frame on the timeline, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or when not to use it. Given the unique purpose among siblings, the context is sufficient to infer usage, but no explicit exclusions or alternative references are provided.

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