get_keyframes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not state the return shape (frames, values, interpolation), what happens when the parameter has no keyframes, or whether errors occur on invalid node_path values. Only the bare read intent is conveyed.

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 first sentence is well front-loaded and the whole entry is short. However, the trailing Args block duplicates the schema's property names with no added information, so a portion of the text does not earn its place.

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 two-required-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description should at least sketch the returned keyframe data or edge cases. Neither is present, leaving the agent under-informed about results despite the simple signature.

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. The Args block only restates the property titles verbatim ('Node Path', 'Parm Name') without adding format, path syntax, or example values, so it adds essentially no meaning beyond the schema.

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 states a clear verb+resource: 'Get all keyframes on a parameter.' An agent can tell it is a read operation against a parameter's animation data, distinct from set_keyframe/delete_keyframe siblings, though it never names those alternatives explicitly.

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 when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives (e.g., get_parameter, which also exposes parameter state), and no prerequisites such as requiring an existing node path or animated parameter. Usage is only inferable from the verb 'Get'.

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