remove_keyframe

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without mentioning side effects, reversibility, error behavior (e.g., if the keyframe doesn't exist), or whether it affects other keyframes. This is a minimal disclosure for a mutation 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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the key action and target, with zero wasted words. It is perfectly sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

The tool is fairly simple with 4 required parameters and no output schema. The description covers the fundamental purpose but omits important context such as exact behavior for duplicate timestamps, error handling, or whether the operation is destructive. Given the presence of similar tools, a brief note on scope (single keyframe vs range) would enhance completeness.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to restate parameter definitions. It adds marginal value by framing the operation as 'from a clip component parameter', which clarifies the relationships among clipId, componentName, and paramName, but this is already implied by the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the action (removes), the target (keyframe from a clip component parameter), and the condition (at a specific time). It is specific enough to distinguish from siblings like remove_keyframe_range (which removes a range) and add_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 usage (when you need to remove a single keyframe at a specific time) but does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools like remove_keyframe_range or specify edge-case conditions. No exclusions or when-not guidance is provided, leaving the agent to infer these from sibling names.

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