set_cine_camera_focus

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true/readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds meaningful detail beyond them: that other focus fields including the tracked actor reset to defaults, and that there is no undo and nothing is saved. That is exactly the kind of irreversibility context an agent needs before mutating editor state.

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 dense sentences front-load the action and scope, with the reset side effect and no-undo caveat following. The embedded 'Returns:' line duplicates the return-type text slightly, but overall there is little waste.

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 destructive mutation tool with no formal output schema, the description supplies the read-back return shape and the irreversibility/no-save facts, so an agent has enough to call and interpret it. It lacks any note on required permissions or preconditions for the target actor existing.

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 the four parameters are already documented. The description restates method/manual focus distance/smoothing but does not clarify the conditional relationship (focus_distance applying only under Manual, smoothing_speed=0 disabling smoothing) beyond what the schema already states, 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?

States a specific verb (replace/set) and a precise resource (focus settings of the CineCameraComponent on an editor-world actor). It also names the resolution mechanism (found by name or label), so an agent can distinguish it from sibling focus/lens tools like set_cine_camera_lens without opening a schema.

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?

Gives contextual guidance ('editor-world actor found by name or label') and states the replace semantics, but never names an alternative tool (e.g., get_cine_camera_settings or the other set_cine_camera_* tools) or a when-not condition. Usage is implied rather than specified.

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