set_keyframe_interpolation

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

The description offers no behavioral context beyond the annotations. Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description does not explain what is destroyed or changed (e.g., whether existing keyframe interpolation is overwritten). It adds no extra detail about side effects or required state.

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, well under any length limits. It efficiently conveys the core action without unnecessary words. However, it is somewhat terse and could benefit from a brief example or clarification of 'action objek'.

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 and only 2 parameters, the description is insufficiently complete. It fails to specify what constitutes an 'object action', how to identify it, or any constraints (e.g., object must have an action with keyframes). Given the destructive annotation, more context is needed for safe usage.

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 compensate. It mentions the three allowed interpolation values (CONSTANT/LINEAR/BEZIER), which partially explains the 'interpolation' parameter, but it does not explain 'object_name' or the default behavior of LINEAR. The parameter semantics are incomplete.

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: setting interpolation (CONSTANT/LINEAR/BEZIER) on an object's action. It uses a specific verb ('Atur' meaning set) and resource ('action objek'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like insert_keyframe or animate_location.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as needing an existing action or selected object, nor explicit comparison to similar animation tools like clear_keyframes or keyframe_animation.

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