anim_clear_animation

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

The annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, and the description adds important behavioral detail about what is affected: only the specified tracks, or the three transform tracks by default. This helps the agent understand exactly what will be removed and what will be preserved, beyond the annotation's simple destructive flag.

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 compact, front-loaded, and bilingual without redundancy. Every sentence contributes meaningful information: what is cleared, when properties narrows the scope, and the default track set.

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 description and schema together cover the essential call details: target objects, optional property list, default transform tracks, and destructive behavior. It could be more explicit about whether all keyframes on a track are removed or whether undo is supported, but for a simple two-parameter tool this is adequately complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the description largely mirrors the schema's parameter explanations. It reinforces the semantics of properties and the default object selection, but adds little beyond what the schema already documents.

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: clearing animation keys on an object, with a specific resource (animation tracks). It also defines the fallback scope (position/rotation/scale) when no properties are given, which distinguishes it from generic animation tools like anim_delete_keys or anim_offset_keys.

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 gives a clear conditional rule: if properties is provided, only those tracks are cleared; otherwise position/rotation/scale are cleared. It does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools or state when not to use it, but the context is unambiguous for usage.

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