ae_set_keyframes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says the tool sets keyframes but does not disclose whether existing keyframes are replaced or appended, whether missing properties are created, or what happens with invalid property paths—important side-effect information for a mutating 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?

Two sentences with no filler: the action is front-loaded, the property alias list is compact and useful, and the keyframe format is summarized efficiently. Every segment earns its place.

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?

Combined with the schema, the description covers the essential invocation details: property paths, keyframe format, and comp/layer identification. However, it omits behavior around existing keyframes and does not clarify precedence or fallback when neither comp_name nor comp_index is provided, leaving a moderate gap for an autonomous agent.

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 high, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema by specifying that time is in seconds, giving canonical property path aliases like Transform/Position, and summarizing the keyframe object shape in a compact form.

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 identifies the action ('Set keyframes') and target ('layer property'), and it gives concrete property path examples. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling setter tools like ae_set_layer_properties or ae_set_expression, so it falls just short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus the many sibling setter/keyframe-related tools. The description explains mechanics such as path aliases and keyframe format, but it never states preferred scenarios, exclusions, or alternatives.

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