set_viewport_direction

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well: it explicitly mentions NO_UNDO (operation is not undoable), states it does not accept a reflective setter, and notes that responses go through server-side apply_response_cap. These are valuable behavioral disclosures beyond the schema.

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?

The description is three short, purposeful sentences. The main action is front-loaded, followed by a list of allowed values and constraints. There is no fluff or redundancy.

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 two-parameter setter with no output schema, the description covers the core purpose, valid inputs, and key side effects (NO_UNDO, no reflective setter). This is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke the tool correctly without additional information.

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 description adds crucial meaning to the 'direction' parameter by listing the seven valid token values, which the schema lacks. However, it does not clarify the purpose or format of the 'ctx' parameter, and the exact mapping from direction tokens to geometryViewportType values is not specified.

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 clearly states the tool maps a direction token to geometryViewportType and invokes changeType, and it enumerates the seven accepted tokens (front/back/left/right/top/bottom/perspective). This makes its purpose specific and distinguishes it from sibling viewport tools like set_viewport_camera or set_viewport_display.

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 implies usage for changing viewport direction but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over alternatives or when not to use it. The note about not accepting a reflective setter is a constraint, not a usage directive.

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