match_frame

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

With no annotations available, the description is responsible for disclosing side effects and behavior. It says nothing about whether the operation changes the playhead, opens the source monitor, requires a selection, or modifies the timeline. 'Expanded operation' provides no meaningful behavioral detail.

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 short, but brevity here is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. The phrase 'expanded operation' adds no value, and the sentence does not earn its place by conveying useful operational 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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and a vague one-line description, this definition is far from complete. An agent cannot determine what inputs are accepted, what the operation returns, what side effects occur, or how it relates to the many sibling tools.

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 has zero defined parameters, so the description is not expected to clarify parameter syntax or meaning. The schema already communicates that no parameters are required, though the additionalProperties: true field is left unexplained.

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 'Premiere Pro expanded operation: match frame' essentially restates the tool name and does not specify what the operation actually does. It fails to distinguish this from siblings like open_in_source or get_clip_at_position, leaving the agent with no concrete understanding of the tool's function.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no context about prerequisites, suitable scenarios, or exclusions, so an agent cannot make an informed selection decision.

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