set_interpolation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states it 'sets' the interpolation mode but does not disclose effects on existing keyframes, whether it modifies selected or all keyframes, if it is destructive, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a mutation 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?

The description is concise, with a clear opening sentence and a simple argument list. It avoids fluff and front-loads the primary action. Minor improvement would be formatting the args in a markdown list, but overall it is efficient.

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 simple tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description lacks crucial context. It does not specify whether interpolation applies to all keyframes or selected ones, the exact allowed values, whether easing is only relevant for BEZIER, or the effect on existing animation. This leaves an agent uncertain about correct invocation and expected outcomes.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It lists the three parameters and gives example values for interpolation (CONSTANT, LINEAR, BEZIER, etc.) and easing (AUTO, EASE_IN, EASE_OUT, EASE_IN_OUT). This adds meaning beyond the schema's types and defaults, though it doesn't explain the semantics of each value or how they interact, and 'etc.' is vague.

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 the tool sets keyframe interpolation mode for an object's animation, which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like set_keyframe (adding keyframes) and set_bezier_easing (setting easing specifically), though it doesn't explicitly contrast them. It could be more specific about whether it applies to all keyframes or selected ones, but the core purpose is clear.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It implies usage by stating its function, but does not mention scenarios where other tools like set_bezier_easing or set_keyframe would be preferred, nor any exclusions. An agent would have to infer from the name and context.

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