Remove keyframes

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

Annotations already signal a mutating operation (readOnlyHint=false), so the description's 'Delete' is consistent and adds no contradiction. It does add the behavioral scope that all keyframes are removed when no range is supplied, and only those in a range when from/to are provided. It does not disclose irreversibility or fallback behavior, but the annotation coverage lowers the burden.

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?

A single 14-word sentence states the action, resource, and scope with no filler. The most important qualifier ('all of them, or those inside a time range') is front-loaded immediately after the verb phrase.

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 tool has five parameters, but all are documented in the schema and only one is required; the description covers the core deletion semantics. No output schema exists, but for a delete operation no return format needs explanation. Missing usage guidance and alternatives slightly reduce completeness, but the combination of schema and description is otherwise adequate.

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 every parameter (property, layer, comp, from, to) is already documented. The description only references 'property' and 'time range' without adding format, units, or default semantics beyond the schema. A baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 uses a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('keyframes from a property'), and clearly scopes the action ('all of them, or those inside a time range'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ae_set_keyframes, which sets keyframes, and ae_remove_effect, which removes effects.

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?

No explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ae_set_keyframes or ae_get_property. The only usage context is the all-or-range scope, which describes the tool's behavior rather than selection criteria. This is closer to no guidance than to a clear directive.

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