viewport_look_at

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does explain the non-moving-camera behavior and the actor priority rule, which is helpful. However, it omits edge cases like what happens when neither parameter is supplied, invalid inputs, or whether the operation affects only the editor viewport versus saved camera state.

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 sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core action and immediately follows with the critical 'without moving camera position' constraint and the priority rule. Every word earns its place.

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?

The tool is relatively simple, and the schema covers parameter details. The description adds the crucial look-at behavior and priority. Still, it does not specify expected return values or error handling, but for a viewport command this is acceptable and mostly complete.

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 schema already documents both parameters at 100% coverage, but the description adds meaningful interactive semantics by explaining the priority order between actor_name and location. This additional guidance helps the agent decide which parameter to populate, exceeding the baseline schema information.

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 action: 'Point camera at coordinates or actor' while adding the key constraint 'without moving camera position.' This distinguishes it from related viewport tools like viewport_focus or viewport_camera, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 gives clear context on when to use the tool (for look-at targeting) and explicitly states the precedence rule when both parameters are supplied. However, it does not mention alternatives or specific scenarios where a different viewport tool should be used.

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