anim-list_actions

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

No annotations are present, but the description explicitly adds the read-only trait and scopes the operation to the file. It does not describe return format or empty-file behavior, but for a zero-parameter list operation this is a reasonable level of disclosure.

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 short, front-loaded sentence states the action and resource, with the read-only qualifier appended parenthetically. No wasted words.

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 trivial zero-parameter read-only list tool, the description is sufficient: it states what is listed and that it is read-only. It would be more complete with explicit output shape or usage guidance, but low complexity keeps the gap small.

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?

There are no parameters and the schema is empty with 100% coverage, so there is no parameter burden for the description to carry. The baseline of 4 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and identifies the resource ('actions in the file'), making the core operation clear. However, 'actions' is somewhat ambiguous and no contrast is made with sibling tools like anim-report or anim-keyframes.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling animation list/report tools, the description does not explain when to choose this one over anim-report, anim-keyframes, or similar.

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