remove_keyframe

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden and delivers almost nothing. It does not say whether the keyframe must exist, what happens on an invalid index or time, whether the operation is undoable, or that it mutates the sequence.

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?

Three words, fully front-loaded, with zero waste. The tradeoff is that the brevity is under-specification rather than disciplined economy, which is penalized elsewhere.

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?

This is a six-required-parameter mutation tool addressing a nested effect/property/keyframe chain, with no annotations and no output schema. The description provides no behavioral or targeting context, leaving the schema to carry everything.

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 schema itself explains effect/property names or indices, keyframe as {index} or {time}, and 0-based track/clip addressing. The description adds nothing beyond that, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

"Delete one keyframe" gives a specific verb (delete) and resource (keyframe), and the word "one" implicitly distinguishes it from clear_keyframes. It stops short of naming that sibling explicitly, so an agent must infer the distinction rather than read it.

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 and no alternatives named, despite four closely related siblings (add_keyframe, get_keyframes, clear_keyframes, set_keyframe_interpolation). The only signal is the word "one," which hints at single vs. bulk deletion but never states it.

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