blender_remove_keyframes

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

The description says the tool 'Deletes' keyframes and can 'clear the whole animation data', which are destructive mutations. The annotations declare destructiveHint=false, so the structured metadata actively contradicts the described behavior. This is a serious inconsistency and the description cannot compensate.

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?

One sentence with no filler; it front-loads the action and each clause earns its place by distinguishing the two deletion modes.

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, mutation-heavy tool with no output schema and only 33% schema description coverage, the description is too thin. It does not explain how the frame range interacts with all, what happens if data_path has no keyframes, what clearing 'whole animation data' includes, or what the response will contain. The contradictory destructiveHint also undermines completeness.

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 33%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It does: 'data path' maps to data_path, 'frame range' maps to frame_start/frame_end, and 'clear the whole animation data' maps to the all flag, while 'object' identifies the required target. It leaves out boundary details, but adds real meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 opens with a specific action verb ('Delete keyframes'), names the target resource (a data path on an object), and clarifies the two supported modes: frame-range deletion or clearing all animation data. This makes the tool immediately distinguishable from animation siblings like blender_insert_keyframe or blender_animation_info.

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?

It gives clear usage context: use this tool to remove keyframes from a data path over a frame range, or to clear all animation data on an object. It does not enumerate explicit exclusion conditions or name sibling alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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