Batch insert multiple keyframes for a Blender object's property in one call, replacing repeated single-keyframe operations.
Batch insert multiple keyframes. Each entry: {frame: int, value: float|list}. More efficient than calling set_keyframe repeatedly.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| object | Yes | ||
| data_path | Yes | ||
| keyframes | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0+hardened.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the operation is a batch insert and notes efficiency, but it does not explain whether existing keyframes are overwritten, how invalid frames are handled, or what the response contains. This is a significant gap for a mutating tool.
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 two sentences with no filler. The main operation is front-loaded, and the entry format is stated efficiently.
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?
Despite having an output schema, the description still leaves required top-level parameters unexplained and lacks behavior semantics for insertion. For a batch mutation tool with no annotations CST, this is not complete enough for an agent to call it confidently.
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. It adds meaning for the 'keyframes' parameter by specifying each entry as {frame: int, value: float|list}, but it says nothing about the meaning or expected format of 'object' and 'data_path', leaving two required parameters underdocumented.
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 states a specific operation ('Batch insert multiple keyframes') and a precise resource. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling 'set_keyframe' by emphasizing batch efficiency, so an agent can tell them apart.
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 when to use this tool versus set_keyframe: use it for multiple keyframes because it is more efficient. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the batch-vs-single contrast provides clear context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.