keyframe_animation

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the mutating nature is covered. The description adds little behavioral context beyond the vague phrase 'dengan nilai yang cocok' (with matching values), failing to disclose whether existing keyframes are overwritten or what prerequisites apply.

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 with no wasted words, front-loading the core action. However, it is so minimal that it sacrifices informative value, though conciseness itself earns a high score.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is severely inadequate for a tool with five parameters and no schema-level descriptions. It does not explain how frames and values pair, what property defaults to, or the effect of interpolation, making it impossible for an agent to use correctly without external knowledge.

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 0%, so the description must clarify parameter meaning. It only hints that frames and values correspond, but does not explain the array structure, the role of 'property', the required 'object_name', or the 'interpolation' option. This leaves most parameters ambiguous.

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 uses the specific verb 'Sisipkan' (insert) and identifies the resource as keyframes placed at multiple frames with matching values. This distinguishes it from singular keyframe tools like insert_keyframe, though it does not explicitly mention the object or property parameters.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as insert_keyframe, animate_location, or set_keyframe_interpolation. The description is a standalone statement with no contextual cues, exclusions, or alternative recommendations.

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