spine_make_loop

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It only states that keyframes are copied, without mentioning whether existing keyframes at targetTime are overwritten, the role of dryRun, or any side effects. The default dryRun behavior is not explained, which could mislead an agent into thinking the tool is destructive.

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 a single sentence, making it concise. However, it omits critical details that would aid an agent, such as parameter explanations and behavioral notes. It earns points for brevity but loses some for not being front-loaded with essential information.

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 tool's complexity (8 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficient. It does not explain common workflows, the meaning of the nested targets parameter, or the return value. The agent would lack context to use the tool 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 13% (only filePath has a description). The description mentions sourceTime and targetTime but adds no format or constraints. Parameters like targets, dryRun, expectedHash, and allowUnsupportedVersion are entirely unexplained. The description does not compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 (copy keyframes from sourceTime to targetTime) and the specific purpose (closing the beginning and end of a loop animation). This distinguishes it from general copy tools like spine_copy_keyframe_range.

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 implies usage for loop animation closure but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like spine_copy_keyframe_range. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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