scene_list_cameras

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/destructiveHint=false, so the closing "Read-only" is largely redundant, but the description earns credit for disclosing the fallback behavior (newest official save when mapPath is omitted) and the meaning of each returned field. That default-resolution rule is behavior an agent could not infer from annotations or schema.

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?

One front-loaded sentence that opens with the verb and resource, then layers return fields and the fallback rule. The long comma-separated field list is dense but each item is informative; the trailing "Read-only" is the only wasted clause.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned fields and their units, and the single optional parameter is fully explained. An agent has everything needed to invoke and interpret the call; only explicit guidance on choosing among the many other scene_list_* tools is absent.

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 0%, so the description must carry the parameter, and it does: omitting mapPath selects the newest official save, which is the only meaningful semantic of the single optional argument. Units on the returned distance and angle fields (metres, degrees) add meaning not present in 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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List the camera templates saved in a map") and immediately enumerates what each entry contains, so the agent knows the exact payload shape before calling. The parenthetical pointer to scene_set_camera draws the boundary from the sibling that mutates cameras rather than listing 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?

"Without mapPath it reads the newest official save" gives an explicit default-mode condition that an agent can act on. It clarifies the read/write split with scene_set_camera but stops short of stating when-not to use this tool or what other listing tools would be preferable for related data.

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