anim_delete_keys

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, and the description adds valuable precision about what gets destroyed: either only the supplied frames or every key on the track. This is exactly the kind of destructive scope detail that helps an agent avoid accidentally clearing more animation than intended.

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?

Two short bilingual sentences deliver the core action and the destructive conditional up front with no filler. The English version mirrors the Chinese text efficiently, and every sentence earns 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?

The schema fully documents all three parameters, and the description covers the essential operation-level behavior: partial deletion via frames versus full track deletion. Since there is no output schema and the destructive effect is the key information, nothing critical is missing.

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% and each parameter already has detailed descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description restates the frames behavior and confirms the property operand, but it does not add new constraints, examples, or semantics 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 states the exact operation ('Delete keyframes of a property') and adds the key conditional behavior: with frames, only those frames are removed; otherwise the whole track is cleared. This makes it clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like anim_set_keys, anim_get_keys, and anim_clear_animation even without naming them.

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 useful conditional guidance for the frames parameter: pass frames to delete only those frames, or omit frames to clear the entire property track. However, it does not explicitly explain when to use this tool versus related alternatives such as anim_clear_animation or anim_set_keys, so tool-selection guidance is only implied.

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