ae_copy_animation

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that keyframes, easing and expressions travel with the copy, defines the stagger formula (offset + n * stagger), notes the replace-before-indexed-group behavior, and crucially states 'One undo step'. It stops short of stating permissions or failure behavior.

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?

Purpose and the Ctrl+C/V analogy are front-loaded, and each subsequent sentence adds a distinct fact (supported targets, stagger math, undo). It is dense but nearly every clause earns its place, with only mild redundancy.

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?

A 7-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema is covered well: behavior, staggering, replace semantics and undo scope are all addressed. The remaining gaps are return value and error/permission behavior, which are secondary here.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: the formula 'Target n (1-based in the given order) is shifted by offset + n * stagger frames' explains the interaction of the offset and stagger parameters, and the property-string examples clarify valid path formats.

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?

States a specific verb (copy) and resource (a property or whole property group with keyframes, easing and expressions) plus the source-to-target direction. It clearly distinguishes itself from write-style siblings like ae_set_keyframes or ae_apply_preset by being a copy operation across layers.

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 'like Ctrl+C / Ctrl+V' analogy and the enumeration of supported targets (text animators, effects, masks, single properties) give clear usage context. However, it never states when to prefer this over overlapping siblings such as ae_apply_preset, ae_set_keyframes or ae_set_expression, so the routing guidance is only implied.

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