set_human_look_at

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only reveals that a zero duration means an indefinite look-at. It does not mention whether the task replaces existing behavior, whether it is asynchronous, how preview affects execution, or what side effects may occur.

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 sentence with no filler, and the most important behavioral note (zero duration equals indefinite) is included up front. Every word contributes, making it highly concise.

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 seven parameters, no annotations, and a large set of related human-control sibling tools, the description is far too sparse. It does not explain how the target is specified, how this task relates to other behavior commands, what the output contains, or whether it blocks or returns immediately.

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 compensate for the seven parameters. It only clarifies duration_seconds' default behavior; human_path, target_position, target_prim_path, preview, command_id, and idempotency_key are left without any added meaning.

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 operation as 'Issue a Behavior Agent LookAt task' and adds that 'zero duration means indefinite.' It identifies the resource and action well, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling human tools like set_human_behavior or set_human_target.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as set_human_behavior, set_human_target, or set_human_idle. The only usage-related hint is the duration semantic, which is a parameter behavior rather than a selection criterion.

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