add_anim_sync_marker

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

Annotations already declare destructive/not-idempotent, but the description adds substantial context they don't carry: it runs in an undo transaction, saves the asset, does not check for duplicate names or validate time against sequence length, and specifies failure semantics (success false with saved=false and save_error). That is exactly the extra behavioral disclosure the dimension rewards.

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?

Front-loads the core operation and its caveats, then the routing hint, then the return shape. No filler; every clause carries operational 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?

For a mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the mutation semantics, the undo/save behavior, the lack of validation, the failure mode, and the return fields. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 the schema already documents anim_sequence_path, marker_name, and time (including its 0.5 default). The description adds the marker-track-0 placement detail but little else beyond the schema, so 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 (append), resource (sync marker), target (UAnimSequence), and even the track (marker track 0). It explicitly names the counterpart tool (remove_anim_sync_marker), so an agent can distinguish this from siblings without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly routes removal to remove_anim_sync_marker and notes two important non-checks (duplicates and time-vs-length), which shapes when it's safe to call. It lacks broader when-to-use framing such as prerequisites for the sequence existing, so it falls short of a full 5.

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