get_anim_notifies

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description still adds value with 'without changing it' and a detailed field list including notify_class vs notify_state_class, which tells the agent what each notify yields. It stops short of any pagination or ordering note, so not a 5.

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-loaded with the action and scope, then the alternatives, then the return shape. The enumerated Returns line is informative rather than padded, though it is somewhat dense; overall efficient with no wasted framing.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description's field-by-field Returns list is exactly the needed compensation. Combined with annotations carrying the safety profile and the schema covering the single param, an agent has everything required to call this correctly.

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?

Only one parameter (animation_path) with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents it. The description adds no format or path syntax detail beyond what the schema provides, which is the expected baseline of 3 when 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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (notify events of a UAnimSequence) plus the exact fields returned, and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling tools that handle track names and montage notifies. An agent can tell it apart from get_notify_track_names and get_montage_info 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?

Names two concrete alternatives with the condition that selects each: get_notify_track_names for track names, get_montage_info for montage notifies. This is explicit when-to-use routing, not inference.

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