preview_motion

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

The annotations already declare that this is a non-destructive, non-read-only, closed-world operation. The description adds useful context by stating that it creates an offline HTML viewer with interactive controls, but it omits where the file is written, whether an existing file is overwritten, and what the generated artifact is named.

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 leads with the action and the artifact, and the feature details are compact.

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?

Although an output schema exists to cover return values, the description is incomplete for a create operation with two undocumented parameters and 0% schema coverage. It lacks prerequisites, output file location, overwrite behavior, and any explanation of how job_id and name affect the result.

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?

The schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention either parameter. It does not explain that job_id is required or what the 'name' default 'motion_00.npz' controls, leaving the agent with no semantic guidance beyond the bare 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 uses a specific verb ('Create') and a concrete resource ('offline HTML animation viewer') with feature details (playback, scrubber, camera controls). It is clear what the tool produces, but does not explicitly differentiate it from siblings like build_character_preview or export_motion.

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 choose this tool versus alternatives such as build_character_preview or export_motion, nor any prerequisites mentioned (e.g., that a completed job_id is required). Usage context is implied only by the tool name and resource type.

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