viewport_camera

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the key partial-update behavior, ensuring the agent understands that omitted parameters remain unchanged. This is sufficient for a simple setter tool.

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?

Single sentence, 16 words, front-loaded with the action and resource. No redundant content.

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 the simple parameter set (3 optional, no output schema, no annotations), the description fully captures the tool's purpose and behavior. The coordinate system and units are defined in the schema, and the partial-update semantics are explicit. No critical information appears 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 input schema already describes all three parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that parameters can be combined ('and/or') and that omitted ones are preserved, giving the agent insight into partial updates beyond individual parameter descriptions.

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 uses the specific verb 'Set' with the resource 'viewport camera', enumerating position, rotation, and FOV. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like viewport_fit or viewport_look_at.

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 for direct camera manipulation and the partial-update behavior ('Preserves existing values for parameters not provided') implies that you can call it to update any subset of parameters. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the context is distinct from other viewport tools.

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