daz_clear_animation

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully bears the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that all keyframes are removed in one operation, the property retains its current value, and it returns a count of removed keyframes. No contradictions exist.

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 efficient and well-structured: a one-line summary, args, returns, example, and note. Every sentence serves a purpose, and key details are front-loaded.

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 removal tool, the description covers inputs, outputs, and behavior completely. The return values are documented, and the example shows typical usage. Given the lack of annotations, this is thorough.

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?

The schema coverage is 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It does so by defining node_label as 'Display label of the node.' and property_name as 'Property label or internal name.' while providing concrete examples. While not exhaustive, it adds significant meaning 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 description clearly states 'Remove all keyframes from a property' and differentiates from sibling tools like daz_remove_keyframe by noting efficiency gains. It uses a specific verb and resource, making the tool's function unambiguous.

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 gives explicit guidance: use when wanting to clear all animation data from a property, and it's more efficient than using daz_remove_keyframe repeatedly. The note and example further clarify appropriate usage scenarios.

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