remove_curve

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without addressing consequences (e.g., what happens if the curve does not exist), reversibility, or side effects on the asset. The docstring adds no behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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 short and front-loaded, which is good for scanning, but it is under-specified. The single sentence plus docstring is concise but omits essential details, making it more under-specification than genuinely useful conciseness.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and 0% schema coverage, the description is incomplete for a mutation tool. It does not explain return values, edge cases, or required preconditions. The presence of an output schema is not relevant because the description does not reference it, and the tool's behavior is not fully transparent.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. The Args section labels 'asset_path' as 'Unreal asset path' and 'curve_name' as 'Curve to remove', which provides minimal clarification but largely restates the parameter names. It does not explain expected formats, constraints, or examples.

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 action ('Remove') on a specific resource ('a curve from an animation'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It is distinguishable from sibling tools like add_curve or get_anim_curves, though it does not explicitly call out differences.

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. While the name implies removal, the description lacks any context about prerequisites, such as whether the curve must exist or the asset must be loaded, and does not compare against similar removal tools.

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