anim_get_frame

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only and non-destructive. The description adds value beyond annotations by specifying that it returns both the frame number and time value, and by explaining the practical risk of skipping this read before keying.

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 and front-loaded: the core action appears in the first line, followed by a practical caution. The bilingual repetition is slightly redundant, but not enough to hurt clarity.

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 zero-parameter, read-only tool, the description is complete: it states what is read, what the output contains, and when to use it. No output schema exists, but the description sufficiently covers the expected return semantics.

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 parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is nothing for the description to add about parameter meanings. The description correctly implies that no configuration is needed to read the current frame.

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 ('Read') and resource ('current timeline frame and time value'), making the tool's purpose clear. It does not explicitly name or contrast a sibling like anim_goto_frame, but 'current' versus 'goto' is enough to differentiate in context.

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 gives explicit usage context: check the current frame before keying to avoid placing keys on the wrong frame. It does not mention when not to use it or point to an alternative for moving the time slider, so it falls short of full routing guidance.

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