Set a text frame’s first baseline offset using page, frame, and offset type, with optional minimum, to control where text begins.
Set first baseline options for a text frame
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| minOffset | No | ||
| pageIndex | Yes | ||
| frameIndex | Yes | ||
| offsetType | Yes | ||
| document_id | No | Which open document to act on: a name (see document_listOpen) or a 0-based index. Defaults to the front document. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.6.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a mutation ('Set') but says nothing about reversibility, required document state, permissions, or how the operation affects existing text formatting.
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 single sentence is efficiently front-loaded and contains no waste. However, its brevity is achieved by omitting useful details rather than through disciplined editing.
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 five-parameter mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and only 20% schema description coverage, the description is far too sparse. It omits when/why to use it, parameter meanings, and behavioral effects.
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 only 20%, leaving four of five parameters undocumented in the schema. The description adds nothing about any parameter, including the required offsetType enum, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.
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 states a specific verb ('Set') and resource ('first baseline options for a text frame'), making the operation clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling text-formatting tools, but no sibling appears to overlap directly.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no context about what problem it solves. The agent is left to infer usage from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.