set_cine_camera_focal_length

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=true). The description adds the return payload shape, which structured fields do not provide, but it does not explain the destructive flag or the effect of overwriting an existing focal length. Given annotations carry the safety burden, a 3 is appropriate.

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 compact sentences with the core action front-loaded and the return shape stated afterwards. No filler, though the Returns block is only marginally useful since there is no output schema.

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 simple two-parameter property setter with no output schema, the description states the operation and the return fields, which is nearly everything an agent needs. Only the usage context and sibling differentiation are thin.

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%, so both parameters, including the 0.0-1000.0 mm range, are already documented. The description restates the millimetre unit but adds no meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3.

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 (set), the exact property (focal length in mm), and the target object (CineCameraActor's CineCameraComponent). This distinguishes it from sibling setters like set_cine_camera_aperture or set_cine_camera_focus, though it never names those siblings 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 guidance, no prerequisites (e.g. camera must exist), and no routing to alternatives such as set_cine_camera_lens or get_cine_camera_settings. Usage must be inferred entirely from the tool name.

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