Camera Manage

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. It does a good job: it explains that make_current=True unmarks previously current cameras of the same class in one undo, that configure is class-aware and coerces Vector2 dicts, that set_limits_2d only changes passed edges, and that get with an empty path resolves to the active camera. It also documents the canonical call shape and compatibility alias. It doesn't mention side effects like whether operations are undoable in general, but the specific undo behavior for create is disclosed.

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 long but well-structured: a one-line summary, a bulleted list of ops with signatures and explanations, and a final note on call shape. The front-loaded summary and consistent op-by-op format make it scannable. It earns its length because it documents eight operations with distinct parameter sets; a shorter version would lose necessary detail.

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's complexity (8 ops, many parameters, no annotations, and a generic schema), the description is quite complete. It covers all ops, parameter semantics, defaults, and the canonical call shape. It also has an output schema, so return values don't need to be described. Minor gaps: it doesn't specify error behavior or what happens when a camera_path is invalid, and the 'properties' parameter for configure is open-ended. But overall, an agent has enough to call this tool correctly.

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 schema's lack of parameter documentation. It does so extensively: each op's parameters are listed with types, defaults, and semantics (e.g., drag_margins: {left,top,right,bottom} fractions [0,1], smoothing_speed=5.0, zero_transform=True). The description adds meaning far beyond the bare schema, which only defines op, params, and session_id. It doesn't document every possible property key for configure, but it gives representative examples and enum names.

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 opens with a clear statement of the tool's domain ('Camera2D / Camera3D authoring') and enumerates the specific operations (zoom, FOV, projection, smoothing, follow). Each op is listed with a verb and resource, making it easy for an agent to distinguish this from sibling tools like node_manage or scene_manage.

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 explicit guidance for when to use the tool (camera authoring) and even tells the agent when NOT to use it: transforms (position, rotation, scale, transform, global_*) should be set via node_set_property, not here. It also explains the canonical call shape and compatibility alias. It doesn't explicitly name alternative tools for every op, but the exclusion for transforms is a strong usage signal.

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