anim_bounce

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the bouncing effect but does not state whether it modifies existing animation, creates keyframes, or is reversible. The term 'preset' is ambiguous about actual side effects.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. The Args list is clear and well-structured. No redundant information, though slight improvement could be made by integrating args description more directly.

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 tool with 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description adequately covers the main functionality and parameter meanings. However, it lacks information about prerequisites (e.g., object must exist) and the exact nature of the 'preset' created.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides brief but clear explanations for all 4 parameters (e.g., 'height: Initial bounce height'), adding value beyond schema titles. However, the explanations could be more detail-rich.

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 tool creates a bouncing animation preset with specific behavior (decreasing amplitude). This distinguishes it from siblings like anim_orbit or anim_set_interpolation, which serve different purposes.

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 vs alternatives. There are many animation-related tools among siblings, but the description does not offer any context about when bouncing is appropriate or what prerequisites exist.

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