move_list_camera_settings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful scoping that results are supported lens ids for a specific field and explains the consequence of not declaring them correctly, but it does not disclose return format, ordering, or other behavioral details. With annotations present, this is adequate but not rich.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The primary purpose is front-loaded, and the second sentence provides a meaningful reason for the tool's existence without 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 zero-parameter, read-only list tool with an output schema present, the description is complete. It names the exact field the ids belong to and explains why the lookup matters. Nothing essential is missing.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to document. The description still adds contextual meaning by tying the list to `Source.camera_settings.lens`, which is enough for a parameter-less tool.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List supported camera lens ids' scoped to `Source.camera_settings.lens`. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling list tools such as move_list_takes, move_list_jobs, and move_list_volumes.

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 explaining that 'Multicam accuracy depends on declaring the lens each camera used,' which implies the tool should be used when configuring camera lens settings. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but no direct alternative exists among the siblings.

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