spine_add_simple_animation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It states the tool only edits JSON and writes generation.manifest.json, but does not disclose other behaviors like overwrite effects (though the overwrite parameter is in the schema) or potential risks of breaking the Spine data. More transparency about side effects would improve the score.

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 two sentences long, front-loads the purpose, and contains no redundant or unclear information. Every sentence contributes meaning.

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?

The description is mostly complete given the tool's complexity and the presence of sibling tools. However, it does not mention prerequisites like the source file needing to be a valid Spine JSON export, nor does it clarify whether the tool validates inputs or provides error messages. This minor gap prevents a perfect score.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context about the tool's overall nature but does not enhance parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. For instance, the schema describes keyframes in detail; the description only reiterates that it's a low-level tool.

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 is for adding one simple bone timeline (rotate, translate, scale) to a Spine JSON copy, and specifies it is a low-level debug tool. It also lists what it does not do (e.g., natural-language planning, packing, exporting), effectively distinguishing it from siblings.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when you already know the exact targetBone and keyframes you want' and provides a list of scenarios where it should not be used, giving clear guidance on when to invoke this tool vs alternatives.

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