set_near_clip_plane

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

Annotations already declare the mutation/destructive/idempotent profile, so the bar is lower. The description usefully adds the effect scope (active editor viewport) and the return shape, but does not explain that the change persists, whether it is reversible, or what 'override_active' implies.

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 a single clear clause, and the inline return listing is compact. Slightly awkward to inline the return contract, but nothing is wasted.

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 viewport setter with no output schema, the description plus the inline return shape and the annotation safety profile cover what an agent needs to call it correctly. Only the persistence/reversibility semantics are left implicit.

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% and the distance parameter is well documented there (cm unit, -1 to clear). The description adds nothing beyond the schema, 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 (Override), resource (near clip plane distance) and scope (active editor viewport), which is enough to tell it apart from get_near_clip_plane and set_far_clip_plane. It does not explicitly name those siblings, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

The description gives no when-to-use guidance and never contrasts this tool with the closely related get_near_clip_plane or set_far_clip_plane. The only usage hint (pass -1 to clear) lives in the schema, not the description.

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