get_camera_fov

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the bar is lower. The description usefully adds the return shape { camera_name, fov }, which is valuable because no output schema exists, though it omits error behavior for a missing or ambiguous camera name.

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 sentences, zero waste, with the action front-loaded and the return shape neatly appended. Every sentence earns its place for a simple one-parameter read tool.

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?

For a low-complexity read with rich annotations and one fully documented parameter, this is complete. The only missing piece typically covered by an output schema, the return shape, is included inline in the description.

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 the single camera_name parameter is fully described in the schema, including that it matches an actor name or label. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 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?

States a specific verb and resource: retrieve the current field of view (FOV) of a camera. It is clearly distinct from the mutation sibling set_camera_fov, but does not explicitly differentiate itself from closely named reads like get_viewport_fov or get_camera_asset_info.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no named alternative. The description only says what it returns, leaving the agent to infer that this is the read counterpart to set_camera_fov.

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