add_curve_keys

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

With no annotations available, the description carries full behavioral burden but only states 'Add keys', which is a minimal mutation disclosure. It does not clarify whether existing keys are overwritten, whether times must be sorted, or what happens if the curve does not exist. The short description leaves these operational details hidden.

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 opening sentence is concise, but the 'Args:' block simply repeats the schema property names and types, adding no new information. The description is under-specified rather than appropriately concise, with redundant content that does not earn 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?

Although an output schema exists (so return value documentation is not needed), the tool is a mutation with four parameters, no annotations, and no usage context. The description does not explain the relationship between times and values, nor any side effects or requirements, making it incomplete for safe and correct invocation.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for missing parameter semantics. It merely lists the parameter names, which duplicates the schema's property titles, and does not explain that times and values are parallel arrays, or what asset_path and curve_name refer to in the Unreal context. This adds no meaning beyond the schema.

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 clear verb ('Add') and specific resource ('keys to a float curve'), making the primary function understandable. However, it does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like add_curve, which adds a whole curve, so it lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as add_curve or remove_curve. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., whether the curve must already exist) or contrast with similar operations.

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