set_viewport_camera

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds substantial behavioral context beyond them: editor-view-only, not undoable or saved, and that invalid input is refused before the camera moves. This meaningfully informs the agent about persistence and failure behavior.

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?

Front-loads the core action and function before alternatives, params, and readback. It is dense and somewhat long, but nearly every clause (scope, exclusions, validation, readback) carries distinct information.

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?

There is no output schema, yet the description spells out the return fields (applied, location_set, rotation_set, location, rotation) and the rotation ordering. Combined with scope, preconditions, validation, and sibling routing, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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% (baseline 3), but the description still adds value: it states units (cm), that rotation is roll/pitch/yaw object or three numbers, and that malformed input is rejected pre-move. It reinforces the schema's rotation ordering warning, though the array index ambiguity is largely already covered in the schema description.

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+resource (place the camera of the active level editor viewport) with the exact target scope (focused viewport, else the first). It explicitly separates itself from siblings set_view_target, set_camera_transform, and focus_viewport, so an agent can pick it without opening another 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 explicit when-to-use framing plus explicit exclusions: a PIE player camera (set_view_target) or a camera actor (set_camera_transform) does not move, and frame an actor with focus_viewport. It also states the precondition that at least one of location/rotation is required and no viewport is an error.

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