animation.fcurve_clean

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint all false allowed. The description adds 'Risk: standard; maturity: L3' and generic policy requirements, which gives minimal extra context but does not disclose actual behavior, side effects, or what the cleaning operation modifies.

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 short, but the first sentence redundantly repeats the tool name. The metadata sentence is factual but does not help an agent understand the operation, so the limited word count is not used productively.

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 9 parameters)Skip no description of purpose, usage, or behavior, this is severely incomplete. An agent cannot infer what cleaning an F-curve means, which parameters matter, or what output to expect, despite the presence of an output schema.

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 only 33% (only internal fields like _requestId and _transactionId have descriptions). The description does not explain any parameters such as dataPath, threshold, objectId, or name, and does not compensate for the large number of undocumented arguments.

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 only states 'PartMe Blender Harness command `animation.fcurve_clean`' followed by risk, maturity, and requirements metadata. It does not state what the tool does, provide a specific verb, or describe the resource being acted upon. This is essentially a restatement of the tool name without any functional meaning.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like blender_animation_fcurve_edit or blender_animation_action_list. The phrase 'Per-request argument checks and session policy still apply' describes general harness requirements, not selection criteria or context of use.

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