center_camera

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the behavioral outcome (resetting to pan=0, tilt=0, zoom=0), but does not mention side effects (e.g., whether this interrupts other operations), permissions needed, rate limits, or error conditions. It adequately describes the core action but lacks broader context.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the purpose ('Return camera to center position') and provides essential details in parentheses. There is no wasted verbiage, and every element 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is complete enough for basic use. It specifies the target state clearly. However, it could benefit from mentioning potential side effects or error handling, which would enhance completeness for a control operation.

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 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description adds value by specifying the exact center position values (pan=0, tilt=0, zoom=0), which clarifies the semantics beyond the empty schema.

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 specific action ('Return camera to center position') and specifies the exact resource/state (pan=0, tilt=0, zoom=0). It distinguishes from siblings like 'control_gimbal' or 'get_gimbal_position' by focusing on resetting to a predefined center rather than arbitrary control or querying.

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 implies usage when the camera needs to be centered, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'control_gimbal' for manual adjustments or 'look_and_analyze' for targeted positioning. It lacks context about prerequisites or exclusions.

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