animate_scale

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

The description only restates the basic action and adds no behavioral context beyond what the annotations (destructiveHint=true) already imply. It does not clarify what happens to existing keyframes, whether it replaces or appends animation data, or any side effects on the object. The description adds no value over the annotations.

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 a single, concise sentence that immediately states the purpose. It is not wordy or redundant. While it is minimal, it effectively communicates the core function without extraneous detail, making it appropriately sized for a tool whose purpose is straightforward.

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?

Given the tool has 6 parameters, a destructive annotation, and no schema descriptions, the description is insufficient for an agent to use it correctly. It lacks information about parameter relationships, default behavior, or what the output represents. The presence of an output schema does not compensate for missing operational context.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage for its 6 parameters, so the description must compensate but does not. It provides no meaning for start_scale, end_scale, start_frame, end_frame, object_name, or interpolation. The agent must rely solely on parameter names and defaults, which are ambiguous for arrays like start_scale and end_scale.

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 the tool's function: animating the scale of an object between two frames. It uses a specific verb (animate) and resource (scale), which distinguishes it from location or rotation animation, but it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like animate_location or animate_rotation.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any prerequisites, limitations, or contexts where another animation tool would be more appropriate. There is no indication of when not to use it, so an agent has no basis for choosing it over siblings.

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