anim_keys_delete

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine non-annotation context: the pose at the current frame remains as a still pose after deletion, which tells the agent the visible result of the operation. It does not state whether deletion is undoable.

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 short sentences with the resource scope front-loaded and the parenthetical enumerating modes efficiently. No filler, though the post-deletion behavior sentence could be tightened.

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?

For a destructive, 5-parameter tool with only 60% schema coverage and no output schema, the description leaves important gaps: reversibility, how the scoping parameters combine, and what happens when only one of start_frame/end_frame is supplied. It covers the headline behavior but not enough for confident invocation.

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 60% and the description maps loosely onto the what/bones/start_frame/end_frame parameters by describing the three deletion modes. It does not clarify how `what` interacts with `bones`, whether a start_frame alone is valid, or that `what` defaults to all, leaving real ambiguity the schema does not resolve.

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?

States a specific verb (deletes) and resource (keyframes) and enumerates the three scoping modes: all of a node's, some bones', or a frame range. It is clearly distinguishable from anim_keys_get/anim_keys_set, though it never names them.

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?

Usage is only implied by what the tool does; there is no explicit when-to-use or when-to-prefer-an-alternative guidance, and no mention of how this differs from a broader node_delete. The three deletion modes give some implicit guidance about applicability.

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