Create a camera in Blender with configurable perspective or orthographic mode, lens focal length, clipping bounds, sensor width, location, rotation, and active state.
新建相机。type: PERSP/ORTHO；lens 焦距 mm。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| lens | No | ||
| name | No | ||
| type | No | ||
| clip_end | No | ||
| location | No | ||
| rotation | No | ||
| clip_start | No | ||
| set_active | No | ||
| sensor_width | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether the camera becomes active, affects scene state, or requires existing objects). It also omits return values or error behavior.
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 extremely brief and to the point, consisting of two short sentences. It avoids redundancy and directly states the action and key parameter hints, though it could be improved with a structured breakdown of parameters.
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?
With nine parameters and no output schema, the description is highly incomplete. It does not explain the overall workflow, how the tool integrates with other camera operations, or what the agent should expect after calling it. The minimal text fails to cover the tool's complexity.
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 description clarifies that 'type' accepts PERSP/ORTHO and that 'lens' is focal length in mm, but it leaves the other seven parameters (location, rotation, clip_start, clip_end, sensor_width, set_active, name) unexplained. Given the schema has no descriptions, this is insufficient coverage.
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 explicitly states '新建相机' (Create camera) with a specific verb and resource, and it clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like list_cameras and set_camera. The added note on type (PERSP/ORTHO) and lens units further clarifies the purpose.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as set_camera or point_camera_at. There is no mention of typical use cases, prerequisites, or conditions favoring this tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.