anim_get_keys

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

Annotations already mark the operation readOnly/non-destructive; the description adds the concrete read payload (frame, value, tangent types) and pagination behavior via limit/offset. It doesn't mention empty-result or error behavior, but the annotation lowers the burden.

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 convey the core function exactly, with no filler. The key action and return values are front-loaded before the pagination note.

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 covers what the tool returns, and the schema/annotations cover parameters and safety. No output schema exists, but the return shape is stated, so the agent has enough to select and invoke it correctly.

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%, so the schema already documents all four parameters including defaults and the objects fallback to selection. The description only restates pagination and property scope, adding little 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 states a specific verb ('read/读取'), resource ('every keyframe of a property'), and the returned data shape (frame, value, in/out tangent type). It is clear, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools such as anim_get_key_stats or anim_get_controller.

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 use case is implied: when you need all keyframes of a property, this is the tool. However, the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives, leaving the agent to infer selection from the name and sibling context.

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