motion studio capture frame

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

Goes well beyond annotations (which only declare readOnly/destructive/idempotent false) by disclosing that it requests native screenshot permission, temporarily moves the camera, stops the current preview, keeps the PNG local, and is experimental until runtime verified. These are exactly the side-effect traits an agent needs before calling a non-readOnly tool.

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?

Four dense sentences, all carrying weight, with the core purpose front-loaded. Slight compression of permission/camera/preview facts into one sentence is efficient but a touch terse.

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 needn't be explained, and the description covers the key side effects (camera move, preview stop, permission prompt, local PNG, experimental status). Minor gap in not clarifying the time parameter range or how the captured frame relates to the session.

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 50%; the description only echoes the 'front or side' view enum and adds nothing for time (0-10) or jointMap. The schema's own descriptions carry most parameter meaning, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (capture) and resource (a frozen animation pose/frame) plus its constraints (front or side, isolated temporary stage). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling motion_studio_capture_chunk, which handles chunk retrieval of the resulting PNG.

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 workflow-ordering hint 'retrieve chunks before capturing another frame' implies usage context, but the description never names alternatives (e.g., motion_studio_preview or motion_studio_capture_chunk) or states conditions for choosing this tool over them. Usage is implied rather than explicit.

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