set_viewport

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose side effects and constraints. It mentions the 64x64 cell limit but does not explain error handling, coordinate semantics, or reversible effects, leaving significant behavioral ambiguity.

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?

A single concise sentence immediately states the core action and constraint. No filler or redundant information.

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 tool with four required parameters and no annotations, the description is underspecified. It omits prerequisites, error behavior, and parameter details, making it insufficient for reliable invocation without additional 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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It maps x/y to 'camera origin' and width/height to 'viewport' and mentions the cell limit, but does not clarify coordinate units, valid ranges beyond the max, or edge cases, offering minimal semantic addition.

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 identifies the action ('Set') and the resource (camera origin and viewport), with a specific constraint (up to 64x64 cells). It is distinct from sibling tools like create_world or get_world_state, though it lacks explicit comparative language.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives, or any context such as requiring an existing world or camera. The description only states the operation.

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