set_viewport_renderer

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly mentions NO_UNDO, error cases for invalid context and renderer, and that responses pass through apply_response_cap. This gives the agent a strong understanding of side effects and failure modes.

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 concise and structured with clear lines for context, renderer constraint, and response handling. It could be slightly more streamlined, but every sentence adds useful information without unnecessary verbosity.

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 switch tool with no output schema, the description covers the key behavioral aspects: scope, prerequisites, and error conditions. It does not explicitly state return values, but the response cap hint and simplicity of the tool make this acceptable.

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 has no parameter descriptions, so the description must add meaning. It explains that renderer must be an identifier from sceneViewer.hydraRenderers() and implies ctx is the LOP context. This partially compensates for the 0% schema coverage, though ctx is not fully detailed.

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 switches the Hydra renderer for the LOP SceneViewer. It uses a specific verb ('switch') and resource ('LOP SceneViewer Hydra renderer'), distinguishing it from sibling viewport tools that adjust camera, display, or direction.

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 provides clear context by stating it is only available in LOP context and that non-LOP usage returns a viewport_unavailable warning. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or provide when-not-to-use guidance beyond the context restriction.

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