clear_animation

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

The annotations already include destructiveHint=true, and the description adds the important warning 'Irreversible', which goes beyond the generic destructive flag. It also specifies the exact data types affected (keyframes and actions), providing context not present in the annotation. No contradiction with annotations.

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 short sentences with zero wasted words. The action is front-loaded ('Remove', not a vague phrase), and the additional 'Irreversible' is a single impactful word. Perfectly concise.

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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description adequately covers the core purpose and a key behavioral trait. It does not explain what happens if the object is missing or how the output is structured, but given the simplicity and the presence of an output schema, this is acceptable at a high-but-not-perfect level.

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 input schema has one parameter, 'object', of type string, with 0% description coverage. The description only repeats 'from an object' without explaining the expected format (e.g., name, path, or ID). Since the description does not compensate for the lack of schema documentation, parameter semantics are under-specified.

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 states a specific verb ('Remove'), a precise resource ('all animation data (keyframes, actions)'), and a scope ('from an object'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_keyframe, which removes only a single keyframe, or get_keyframes, which retrieves data.

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 clearly implies the use case: when you need to completely clear an object's animation data. It does not explicitly name alternatives or list when-not-to-use scenarios, but the context is evident from the tool purpose and the sibling list. Slightly more explicit guidance about preferring this over batch_delete or individual keyframe removal would boost the score.

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