set_keyframe_velocity

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Set' implies a write/mutation operation, the description doesn't address important behavioral aspects like whether this requires specific permissions, whether changes are destructive or reversible, what happens if invalid values are provided, or what the expected response format is. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 extremely concise - a single sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and target, and the parenthetical 'speed graph' efficiently clarifies the technical meaning of 'velocity' in this context. 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?

For a mutation tool with 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what happens after setting velocity, what valid velocity ranges are, how this interacts with other keyframe properties, or what errors might occur. The description should provide more operational context given the tool's complexity and lack of supporting structured data.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents all 6 parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's in the schema. The baseline score of 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting, though the description could have provided context about how velocity values are interpreted (units, typical ranges, etc.).

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 ('Set velocity') and target ('for keyframes'), with 'speed graph' providing helpful context about what velocity means in this animation context. It doesn't specifically differentiate from sibling tools like 'set_keyframe_interpolation_type' or 'set_temporal_ease', but the purpose is unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple keyframe-related tools in the sibling list (set_keyframe, set_keyframe_advanced, set_keyframe_interpolation_type, set_temporal_ease), there's no indication of how this specific velocity-setting tool relates to or differs from those other options.

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