set_view_angle

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

The description states the primary effect (setting the 3D view angle) and explains the custom-mode condition, but it does not disclose whether the change is viewport-only, persists across operations, or affects the saved model. With all Hints false, the description carries the burden; this is adequate for a simple view setter 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 compact, front-loaded with the purpose, and organized by parameters. The bilingual repetition adds a little length, but every element earns its place and no fluff is present.

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 simple tool with three optional parameters and no output schema, the parameter details are complete. However, the description omits tool-selection context, behavioral side effects, and any interaction with related display tools, leaving an agent to infer when and how to integrate this with other operations.

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 fully compensates. It enumerates all valid angle_preset values, explains their meaning, clarifies that horizontal/vertical apply only to 'custom', and provides bilingual labels. This is more than enough for an agent to construct valid arguments.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Set the 3D view angle of the bridge model.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from display-related siblings like reset_display and set_render, and the multilingual phrasing reinforces the intent without ambiguity.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusion criteria or prerequisites. The only usage hint is parameter-level ('Set to custom to use horizontal/vertical rotation'), which does not help an agent choose this tool over sibling display or view tools.

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