blender_insert_keyframe

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

Annotations already indicate a mutating, non-idempotent operation. The description adds useful behavioral context by explaining the default target (active object's location) and the ability to key arbitrary data paths. It does not disclose the effect of the rotation, scale, objects, or group parameters, or what happens if conflicting flags are set.

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 concise sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the data_paths example is compact and useful. Every sentence 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?

This is a complex tool with eight optional parameters, low schema coverage, and no output schema. The description covers the default behavior and data_paths, but lacks explanation of object targeting, group handling, the boolean toggles, and expected output or failure behavior. An agent would have to infer too much to use all features reliably.

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 only 13%, so the description needed to compensate. It does explain frame and data_paths with a concrete example, and notes the location default. However, it leaves group, scale, rotation, and objects mostly unexplained, even though these are meaningful parameters for keyframing.

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 starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Insert keyframes on the current or given frame.' It clearly identifies the tool's function and distinguishes it from sibling tools like blender_set_frame or blender_animation_info. The added detail about defaulting to the active object's location further clarifies scope.

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 clearly implies the main use case—inserting keyframes—and explains how to key custom data paths with data_paths. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as blender_run_operator or blender_execute_python, nor does it mention when it should not be used.

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