remove_anim_curve

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

Annotations only flag it as destructive and non-idempotent. The description goes well beyond: it discloses the single-undo-step behavior, the no-op case (removed=false, nothing saved), and the save-failure semantics (success=false, saved=false, save_error). This is exactly the extra behavioral detail not present in structured fields.

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 core action and its atomicity, then the edge cases and return shape. It is dense with failure semantics but every clause earns its place; slightly compact for a first read.

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?

Though there is no output schema, the description supplies the full return shape and all relevant outcome branches (removed, saved, save_error), plus the undo/save behavior. An agent has everything needed to invoke and interpret results.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real meaning by stating that any curve_type other than 'transform' targets float curves, effectively documenting the default and the targeting rule, which the schema does not state.

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 (Remove) plus resource (float or transform curve) plus scope (from a UAnimSequence via its data controller). An agent can distinguish this from siblings like add_anim_curve_name or rename_anim_curve 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?

Provides useful context that the operation occurs through the data controller as one undo step and saves the package, and clarifies the curve_type default ('any curve_type other than transform targets float curves'). However, it never names or routes to alternatives such as remove_anim_curve_name, so the when-to-use-this-vs-sibling guidance is only implied.

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