tween_cel_scale_eased

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention key behaviors such as whether existing cels are replaced (parameter 'replace'), whether missing cels are created ('create_missing_cels'), or how the source frame index affects the tween. The minimalist description leaves the agent uninformed about side effects or assumptions.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence, but it sacrifices completeness. It does not provide enough information to earn its place; it essentially restates the tool name with minor elaboration. For a tool with 11 parameters, this is under-specified rather than appropriately concise.

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?

Given the complexity (11 parameters, 6 required, many sibling tween tools), the description is severely incomplete. It lacks an overview of tween behavior, relationship to other tween tools, and explanation of keyframe concepts. The absence of output schema further increases the need for descriptive completeness, which is unmet.

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% and the description adds no meaning beyond the schema. It does not explain any of the 11 parameters, including critical ones like start_scale, end_scale, easing, or anchor. The agent must rely entirely on parameter names, which may be insufficient.

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 tweens cel scale with easing across a frame range, specifying the verb 'tween', resource 'cel scale', and context 'with easing across a frame range'. It is distinguishable from siblings like tween_cel_opacity_eased, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as tween_cel_opacity_eased or tween_cel_positions_eased. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions.

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