ptz_move

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

Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true, which contradicts the typical behavior of relative movement commands (e.g., moving 'up' twice is not idempotent). The description does not address this inconsistency or explain that 'stop' might be idempotent. It adds the list of directions but lacks disclosure on effects like whether commands are relative vs absolute.

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 that front-loads the verb and resource. It includes all essential information without any filler words. Every word earns its place.

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 the tool has 3 parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks clarification on the critical distinction between relative and absolute movement, especially when sibling tools like set_ptz_position exist. The mention of 'home' direction is ambiguous without context.

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 descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds marginal value by listing the move directions again and stating 'relative', but does not explain the meaning of 'home' or the range for speed beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'send' and resource 'relative PTZ move command', listing specific directions. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like set_ptz_position or goto_ptz_preset, leaving ambiguity about when to use this tool over others.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Usage is implied by the nature of the command (PTZ movement), but no when-not-to-use or alternative references are given.

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