set_keyframe_interpolation_when_supported

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It usefully signals that a keyframe must pre-exist (this won't create one) and that it mutates existing state, but omits what happens on failure, whether the change is reversible, or any auth/permission needs.

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?

A single, well-front-loaded sentence with the verb and resource leading. No redundant or filler content.

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 13-parameter tool with multiple ways to identify the target clip/property, the description is thin. It doesn't clarify the identity-resolution options or the capability-gating implied by 'when_supported', though the rich schema mitigates the gap and no output schema needs explaining.

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 85%, so the schema already documents the parameters, including the interpolation_mode enum values. The description's mode list adds no meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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?

States a specific verb (Set) and resource (keyframe interpolation mode) and enumerates the accepted modes, pinpointing it against siblings like add_property_keyframe and update_property_keyframe. The phrase 'at an existing keyframe on a clip property' scopes the operation precisely.

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?

'at an existing keyframe' implies the prerequisite that a keyframe must already exist, which is useful when-to-use context. However, it never names alternatives (add_property_keyframe, update_property_keyframe) or states when not to use it, leaving usage largely to inference.

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