Set Keyframe Interpolation

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

Annotations already declare this as a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent write. The description adds useful behavioral context that Premiere exposes no interpolation readback and that writes are reported as committed_unverified, but the remaining sentences are obscure evidence claims rather than actionable behavioral 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?

The first sentence is front-loaded and clear, and the committed_unverified caveat is useful. However, the final sentence about capture reports and macOS evidence is long, speculative, and does not help an agent invoke the tool correctly, so the description is not 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?

With a full input schema, an output schema, and safety annotations, the description covers the core action and the unverified-write caveat. It still lacks usage guidance and alternative-tool routing, and the evidence-heavy language does not compensate for those gaps.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all five parameters and the interpolation enum. The description restates the Linear/Hold/Bezier options but adds no syntax or selection guidance beyond the 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 first sentence gives a specific verb and resource: set the interpolation type of an existing keyframe, with the valid modes enumerated. It clearly distinguishes this from reading or adding keyframes, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools.

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 phrase 'existing keyframe' implies the keyframe must already exist, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use condition, and no alternative tool named. An agent must infer that it should locate a keyframe via get_keyframes first.

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