List animation clips inside a bundled GLB

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by explaining the range-extraction and caching process, which goes beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence delivers the core function; the second adds a key default behavior. Every sentence earns 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?

Given the presence of an output schema (so return format is handled), the description covers the main behavioral aspects: caching, automatic selection, and the result being named clips. It could clarify that it only lists names (not downloads), but that's inferable from sibling tools.

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 33% (low, <50%), so the description should compensate. It only explains entryPath ('omit to select standard non-root-motion GLB'), leaving packId and uploadId unexplained. Without that context, the agent may not infer their roles from names alone, especially since packId has an enum but no guidance.

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 clearly states the tool lists animation clips inside a bundled GLB, using specific verbs and the resource. The title reinforces this. The tool is well-differentiated from siblings like asset_download_bundle_animation (download) and asset_list_bundle_entries (list entries).

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?

The description provides guidance on omitting entryPath to automatically select the standard non-root-motion GLB, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, such as when only animation names are needed. It lacks explicit usage context or exclusions.

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