list_supported_keyframe_properties

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden, but it only notes the Premiere Pro 2019 platform. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, what returns look like, or what prerequisites (open project/sequence) are required.

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 filler. Every word contributes to identifying what the tool lists.

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 tool with five optional identifier parameters, no required parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description does little beyond stating the purpose. It omits usage guidance, return expectations, and identifier-selection semantics, leaving the agent under-equipped to invoke it confidently among siblings.

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 100%, so the five parameters are already documented in the schema, and the description adds only the framing 'on a timeline clip.' It does not clarify how clip identifiers relate to each other or which combination is required, leaving an important semantic gap despite high coverage.

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 ('List'), resource ('component properties on a timeline clip'), and scope ('that support time-varying keyframes in Premiere Pro 2019'). This differentiates it from broader sibling tools like list_component_properties, though it does not explicitly name an alternative.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no comparison to related tools such as list_component_properties, read_clip_properties, or get_property_keyframes. Usage is only implied by the keyframe-supporting filter.

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