design_set_camera_preset

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden alone and does disclose one important behavior: 'Creates a camera layer if none exists.' It does not say whether an existing camera is replaced or modified, whether the action is reversible, or what permissions/state are required, leaving meaningful gaps for a mutation tool.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and side effect, then a compact glossary of values. Every clause carries information; nothing is 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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the action, the side effect, and all enum meanings. What's missing is what happens when a camera already exists and whether the returned state should be re-read, but the remainder is adequate.

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 coverage is 100% with a single enum, and the schema description is only 'Camera preset name.' The description goes beyond it by defining what each preset actually means (altitude, tilt, FOV, orthographic), which genuinely helps the agent choose a value rather than just pass a valid string.

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 verb and resource ('Apply a named camera preset') and immediately clarifies the side effect. The enumerated preset list makes the intent concrete and implicitly separates it from sibling camera tools like design_orbit_camera or design_set_camera, though it never names them explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: an agent can infer this is a one-shot framing setup versus manual camera manipulation, and the preset definitions help selection. However, there is no explicit 'use this when...' guidance or reference to alternatives such as design_set_camera or design_orbit_camera.

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