frame_selection

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a state dependency (it acts on the 'current selection'), which is useful, but says nothing about what happens with an empty selection, whether the camera move persists, or whether the operation requires a specific viewport context. Adequate but thin for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. For a zero-argument viewport action this is the right size.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the action itself is simple. However, with no annotations and no mention of empty-selection behavior or viewport prerequisites, the definition is only minimally sufficient given the absence of all structured behavioral hints.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the schema has nothing for the description to explain. The baseline of 4 applies; the description cannot add parameter meaning where none exists.

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?

States a specific verb (frame) and target (viewport on the current selection), which is clear enough for an agent to distinguish it from the sibling frame_all, frame_bbox, and frame_usd_prim. It stops short of naming those siblings, so it earns a 4 rather than 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?

No when-to-use guidance and no explicit alternatives. With frame_all, frame_bbox, and frame_usd_prim in the sibling list, the description should say when to frame the selection instead of the whole scene or a bounding box, but it leaves that entirely to inference.

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