set_keyframe_interpolation

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but discloses nothing behavioral: it doesn't say whether the edit is undoable, whether it mutates the clip/project state immediately, what errors occur for a bad index path, or whether the enum list in the text is exhaustive. The trailing 'etc.' actively muddies things since the schema enum is closed.

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 with no filler. The vague 'etc.' is the only wasted token and slightly undercuts the precision of the rest.

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?

Seven required parameters forming a nested addressing path, no annotations, and no output schema — the description gives no help on constructing the path or on failure modes. It is underspecified for a mutation tool of this complexity.

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 all seven parameters are already documented, and the description's list of interpolation modes merely restates the schema enum. It adds no guidance on the index chain (trackType→trackIndex→clipIndex→effectIndex→propertyName→keyframeIndex), which is where confusion is most likely. Baseline 3.

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 verb and resource (set the interpolation type for a keyframe) and names concrete modes (linear, bezier, hold), which cleanly separates it from add_keyframe, remove_keyframe, and get_keyframes. It stops short of acknowledging the deep track/clip/effect/property addressing that actually defines this tool's operation.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this versus add_keyframe/get_keyframes, no precondition that the target keyframe must already exist, and no mention of what happens to a keyframe with unsupported interpolation. The agent must infer all of that.

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