List Animation Tracks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that vector tracks appear as separate entries per component, which is a behavioral detail. However, it does not mention potential side effects, permissions, or rate limits. The read-only nature is implied but not explicit.

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 redundancy. First sentence states the action and return shape; second adds a critical behavioral detail about vector tracks. Every word 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 single parameter and no output schema, the description covers the return format, chaining possibilities, and special-case handling of vector tracks. It lacks information on ordering or limits, but those are minor for a simple enumeration tool.

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 schema already documents the handle parameter well. The description does not add further meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable per guidelines. Baseline 3 applies.

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 that the tool enumerates CTracks on an entity, specifying the return fields and even chaining hints. It's not a tautology and distinguishes itself from other listing tools via its focus on animation tracks.

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 implies usage for listing tracks but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives (e.g., when not to use list_tracks). It provides chaining guidance (pipe into get_keyframes/set_keyframe), which is helpful, but no exclusion criteria.

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