ue_sequence_add_key

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the side-effect of re-reading all keys and the instability of Unreal's numeric suffix, which is valuable context. However, it doesn't mention overwrite behavior, errors, or return format.

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 front-loaded with the purpose and then provides an organized Args list. It is appropriately detailed for 9 parameters with no wasted words.

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?

All 9 parameters are explained with enough detail to invoke the tool correctly. The only notable gap is the return value from the re-read operation, which is mentioned but not described.

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%, but the description explains every parameter in detail, including channel format examples, track vs track_type alternatives, section default, and interpolation enum. This fully compensates for the empty schema descriptions.

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 clearly states it adds a key to a channel and re-reads all channel keys. The verb 'mette una chiave' and resource 'canale' are specific, distinguishing it from siblings like ue_sequence_add_track and ue_sequence_add_actor.

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 provides implicit usage context and a cross-reference to ue_sequence_info for listing channels, but it doesn't explicitly compare against alternatives or specify when not to use. It does give prerequisite guidance on channel naming and track selection.

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