set_keyframe_advanced

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'set a keyframe with easing options,' but doesn't explain what happens to existing keyframes, how easing affects interpolation, whether the tool mutates the project state directly (likely yes), or any side effects. It doesn't describe return behavior or errors. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.

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 short sentence, which is concise but under-specified. Conciseness should still provide necessary information; this fails to do so, as it says nothing beyond a tautological expansion of the tool name. It's not front-loaded with useful content.

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?

Given the high complexity (11 parameters, nested objects, enums), minimal schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It doesn't explain the easing model, how to specify target layers (layerName vs layerIndex), or the meaning of 'inEase'/'outEase' objects. The agent would likely misuse the tool without additional info.

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 very low (3 out of 11 parameters are described, ~27%). The description adds nothing about parameter semantics beyond the schema's enum and property names. For instance, 'inEase' and 'outEase' are not explained, nor how 'compId' vs 'compName' are used. The description fails to compensate for the low coverage.

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 ('Set a keyframe') and the resource ('property'), and distinguishes it from the simpler 'set_keyframe' sibling by implying advanced easing options. It is concise and specific, though it doesn't explicitly mention the tool's focus on easing beyond the name.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool over alternatives like 'set_keyframe', 'apply_easy_ease', or 'set_temporal_ease'. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing a composition/layer context), nor when NOT to use it. The description offers no context about typical use cases or selection criteria.

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