clear_animation

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, and the description adds the important behavioral detail that the operation is irreversible. It also specifies what gets removed (keyframes and actions), which is useful context beyond the annotation. No contradiction with annotations.

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 a single sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and scope, then adds the critical irreversibility warning. Every word earns its place.

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 simple one-parameter destructive tool with annotations and an output schema, the description is largely sufficient. It states the operation, target, and irreversibility. The main gap is the lack of parameter clarification and explicit alternative routing, but these are minor given the tool's simplicity.

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%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented 'object' parameter. The phrase 'from an object' adds minimal meaning beyond the schema property name and does not clarify how the object should be identified (e.g., name, path, or ID).

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 ('Remove') and resource ('all animation data (keyframes, actions) from an object'), making the tool's scope clear. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like delete_keyframe by emphasizing that it removes all animation data, not just a single keyframe.

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 implies the tool is for clearing all animation data from an object, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like delete_keyframe or list_actions. No exclusions or alternative routing are provided, so the agent must infer usage context.

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