Focus Capture One browser on a collection by name or ID; changes only the display, not image data.
Focus a collection in the Capture One browser by name or id. Changes only what is displayed; no image data is touched.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name_or_id | Yes | Collection name (case-insensitive) or its id |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Description explicitly states 'no image data is touched' and 'changes only what is displayed', while annotations mark destructiveHint=true. This directly contradicts the annotation's implication of destructive side effects, so per rubric this dimension must score 1.
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?
Two tight sentences; the first states the action and lookup key, the second preempts concerns about data mutation. No filler.
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 one-parameter setter with no output schema, the description gives enough information to invoke it and states its only side effect. It doesn't explain whether the focused collection becomes the active context for subsequent sibling calls, but that is a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.
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 covers 100% of the single parameter, describing it as 'Collection name (case-insensitive) or its id'; the tool description merely repeats 'by name or id' without adding format, examples, or disambiguation. Baseline 3 applies because the schema does the heavy lifting.
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?
States a specific action ('Focus a collection') on a specific resource ('in the Capture One browser') plus the selection key ('by name or id'). It differentiates itself from sibling collection/list tools by clarifying it changes the browser view rather than returning or modifying collection data.
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 conveys the intended use: switching the current collection in the browser. It doesn't name alternative tools or explicit exclusion conditions, so it stops short of 5, but the context ('changes only what is displayed') provides enough guidance for an agent to select it over data-returning sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.