setEffectPropertyKeyframe

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It conveys that a keyframe is added with easing, but does not disclose whether an existing keyframe at the same time is overwritten, whether the change is undoable, what permissions/selection context are required, or what the call returns. For a mutation tool this is a substantial gap.

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-formed sentence with the core action front-loaded and no filler. It is appropriately sized, though it is too terse to carry the behavioral detail the tool needs.

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 schema is rich and fully self-describing, and no output schema exists, so much of the calling contract is covered. However, with nine parameters, no annotations, and a mutation side effect, the one-line description leaves usage context and overwrite/return behavior unaddressed.

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 100%, so every parameter is already documented, including the interpolation enum and defaults. The description adds only a generic restatement ('specific time with easing curve interpolation'), which does not extend meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (add keyframe to animate) and resource (effect parameter), with scope narrowed to effect-level properties rather than layer properties. This separates it from setLayerKeyframe implicitly, but the distinction is never made explicit, so an agent must infer it from the word 'effect'.

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of the sibling setLayerKeyframe (for layer transforms) or setEffectProperties (for static values). The agent gets no help choosing among the keyframe- and effect-related siblings.

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