frame_usd_prim

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It reveals that the framing targets the prim's bbox rather than the infinite grid, which is a useful behavioral hint, but it omits whether the operation moves the camera, which viewer it defaults to, or what happens when the prim cannot be resolved.

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?

One tightly written sentence with the action front-loaded and no filler. The trailing parenthetical is compact, though 'hero' is jargon that some agents may not resolve.

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 tool with no annotations, three undocumented parameters (two required), and no parameter explanations, the description is too thin. The output schema is present so return values need not be covered, but the invocation contract remains ambiguous.

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 0% for three parameters. The description implies 'prim_path' via 'USD prim bbox' and gestures at 'viewer', but never explains the role of 'path', how it differs from 'prim_path', or how 'viewer' selects a target. It does not 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?

States a specific verb (frame) and resource (LOP viewer on a USD prim bbox), which an agent can distinguish from generic siblings like frame_all. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with frame_selection or frame_bbox, both of which could plausibly be confused with it.

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 parenthetical '(hero, not the infinite grid)' hints at the framing behavior but does not say when this tool should be chosen over frame_selection, frame_all, or frame_bbox. No prerequisites or conditions are given.

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