get_cameras

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real value by spelling out the return payload, including total_count, max_results, and a truncated flag that signals pagination behavior — context the annotations do not provide.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by a compact return-shape block. No filler, and every element (fields, pagination flags) carries information, though the return block is somewhat dense.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose and the full return shape, which is what an agent needs. It is essentially complete; the only gap (when to prefer it over sibling camera getters) is a usage concern rather than a completeness one.

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?

The single max_results parameter is fully documented in the schema (100% coverage), so the description need not repeat it. The description's listing of max_results/truncated in the return hints at pagination, but adds no syntax or default information beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (list) plus resource (camera actors) and scope (editor world), and names the returned fields (transform, FOV). The word 'all' distinguishes it from sibling singular getters like get_camera_transform, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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, when-not-to-use, or alternative-tool guidance. Given the many camera-related siblings (get_camera_transform, get_camera_fov, get_camera_rig_nodes, get_cine_camera_settings), an agent gets no help choosing between them. Usage is only implied by the verb.

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