geogebra_animate

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the tool animates a mechanism controlled by a slider but does not describe side effects, required setup (e.g., existing construction with a slider), error handling, or what happens when the label is invalid.

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 extremely concise with a one-line purpose statement followed by clear parameter descriptions. No fluff or redundant information. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 the low schema coverage and no annotations, the description adequately explains the parameters but misses broader context such as prerequisites (e.g., an existing mechanism with a slider) and how the animation interacts with other GeoGebra operations. The presence of an output schema partially compensates.

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%, but the description adds meaning for all three parameters: label as slider tag (e.g., 'α'), animate as whether to start animation, and speed as speed in range 0.1-10. This goes beyond the schema which only provides titles and types.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: '设置动画——让滑块控制的机构动起来' (Set animation - make the mechanism controlled by the slider move). The verb '设置动画' and the specific resource '滑块控制的机构' distinguish it from sibling tools like geogebra_draw_mechanism.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, conditions for effective use, or situations where other tools (e.g., geogebra_exec, geogebra_run_commands) would be more appropriate.

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