gsap-animate

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

No annotations are given, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as side effects on existing animations, whether it modifies DOM directly, or potential performance implications. For a mutative tool, this is insufficient.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently states the core action, though it could benefit from slightly more detail without becoming verbose.

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?

With 7 parameters (4 required) and nested objects, the tool is complex. The description does not explain the differences between animation types, how to use 'fromProperties', or expected outcomes. No output schema further reduces 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 schema already documents all 7 parameters. The description adds no additional semantic meaning, such as explaining how 'fromProperties' differs from 'properties' or providing examples. 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 uses a specific verb 'Create' with the resource 'GSAP animations' and explicitly lists the three animation methods (to, from, fromTo). This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like gsap-stagger or gsap-draggable.

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. It does not mention prerequisites, preferred use cases, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer context from the name alone.

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