get_animation_css

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only extraction from stylesheets, which is non-destructive, but it does not describe return format, coverage of inline styles, or potential side effects like performance impact. The verb 'extract' provides some behavioral clarity but not rich detail.

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, concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. No wasted words.

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?

The tool is simple with no parameters, and the description conveys the core function. However, the absence of an output schema means the description could slightly elaborate on the returned data (e.g., list of animation names vs. raw CSS), but overall it is adequate for a straightforward extraction 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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly omits parameter details, and no extra parameter semantics are needed.

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 uses a specific verb ("Extract") and a clear resource ("all CSS animations and keyframes from the page stylesheets"). It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like 'get_element_animations' (per-element) and 'extract_animation_code' (likely targeted code extraction) by specifying page-wide scope.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'extract_animation_code' or 'get_element_animations'. The description states only the function, not the intended use case or exclusions.

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