add_keyframe

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic operation, without mentioning prerequisites (e.g., component/parameter must exist), overwrite behavior if a keyframe already exists at the same time, or potential side effects. This is similar to the 'update drive' example which scored 2.

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 sentence with no wasted words, and it front-loads the action and object. It is concise and appropriately structured for the simplicity of the tool, though it lacks nuance.

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?

Given 5 required parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and a sparse description, the tool context is incomplete. It does not explain how parameters work together, whether the operation is idempotent, or what conditions must be met (e.g., the clip must have the specified component and parameter). An agent would need to infer significant details.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with each parameter described, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add meaningful detail beyond the schema; it restates that time is in seconds, which the schema already provides.

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 ('adds') and identifies the exact resource ('keyframe to a clip component parameter at a specific time'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like remove_keyframe, get_keyframes, and set_keyframe_interpolation.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is for animating parameters over time, nor does it contrast with direct setters like set_clip_opacity or set_clip_volume. No exclusions or alternative references are provided.

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