animate_zoom

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It explains supported directions, easing curves, keyframes, and presets, which is useful, but it does not state whether the operation overwrites existing clip keyframes, mutates the timeline, or requires a particular clip selection. 'Animate' implies a state change but the consequences are left implicit.

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 tightly written, front-loads the core purpose, and then enumerates only the option values an agent needs to know. The easing and preset lists are long but directly useful because the schema provides no enums or descriptions.

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?

Despite an output schema, the tool is complex with 13 optional parameters, no annotations, and 0% parameter description coverage. The description fails to explain several operational aspects an agent needs to call the tool correctly, especially the keyframe array structure, coordinate system, and reset behavior.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does add value for direction, easing, and preset values, but it leaves major parameters unexplained: reset, item_id, track_index, start_zoom/end_zoom semantics, start_frame/end_frame relationships, target_center_x/y coordinate meaning, and the required shape of keyframe objects. This is a significant gap for a 13-parameter tool.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Animate a clip's scale and framing over time.' It distinguishes itself from static transform tools like set_clip_transform by emphasizing animation over time, and names concrete use cases (smooth zooms, punch-ins, rebounds, pull-outs, multi-keyframe paths).

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 first sentence clearly establishes the usage context: this is for animating scale/framing over time rather than setting a static transform. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is unambiguous and the supported modes are clearly listed.

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