delete_keyframe

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

With no annotations, the description alone must disclose behavioral traits. It states the destructive action ('delete') but omits details such as whether the operation is reversible, requires existing keyframes, or has side effects on the animation. The singular sentence provides no additional behavioral context.

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 redundancy. It is concise, but the extreme brevity sacrifices informational value; it could be slightly expanded without losing conciseness.

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?

The tool has 4 parameters (3 required), no parameter descriptions, and no behavioral context. The description does not explain typical usage, how to locate a keyframe, or what the outcome looks like. It is far from complete for an agent to correctly invoke it without external knowledge.

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 by explaining parameter meanings. It does not mention how to identify the keyframe (e.g., via object_name, data_path, frame) or what the index parameter does. The description adds no semantic value beyond the schema's field names.

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 action (delete), the resource (keyframe), and the context (animated object property). It is specific enough to distinguish from sibling tools like insert_keyframe or set_keyframe_interpolation, which are complementary operations.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The tool's purpose is self-evident, but it fails to address scenarios like checking existing keyframes or differences from other keyframe-related tools.

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