Set keyframes

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so safety profile is covered. Description adds the Magic Easing concept and example structure, but doesn't clarify what happens on frames that already have keyframes (overwrite? append?) or permission requirements.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then a concrete example. Efficient but the example is long; still, it earns its place by clarifying structure.

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 mutation tool with annotations covering safety, the description is adequate but missing: behavior on existing keyframes, return format, and how it interacts with cavalry_set_attributes. No output schema to offload return details, so the description could say more about what's returned.

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 50%. The example clarifies the shape of the values map and easing application, which is helpful. However, the 'expression' property is not explained in the description, leaving half the nested parameter semantics to the schema alone.

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?

States a specific verb (Create) and resource (keyframes on a layer). Clear what it does, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling cavalry_delete_keyframes or cavalry_set_attributes.

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?

Implied usage by describing keyframe structure, but no explicit when-to-use vs cavalry_set_attributes or cavalry_delete_keyframes. An agent might wonder whether to set keyframes here or attributes elsewhere.

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