camera.set

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only says 'Set', implying mutation. It lacks details on side effects, permissions, or behavior when setting invalid combinations (e.g., ortho_scale with PERSP type). The description needs to compensate for missing annotations.

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 extremely concise (6 words), which is efficient but comes at the cost of detail. It lacks structure or any front-loading of critical information, though it does capture the core action.

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?

Given 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, error conditions, or the relationship between parameters (e.g., clipping distances must be positive, type affects ortho_scale usage). A more complete description would include these constraints.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters beyond their titles. The description does not add any meaning to the six parameters, leaving the user to infer from titles alone. For example, it doesn't clarify that clip_end must be > clip_start or that ortho_scale only applies to ORTHO type.

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 'Set common camera data properties', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like camera.create and camera.report by implying modification of existing camera properties, but lacks explicit mention that it modifies an existing camera.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like camera.set_active or camera.create. The description does not specify prerequisites, when not to use it, or common usage scenarios.

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