generate_panorama_mission

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

It explicitly states the tool auto-saves the mission to the account and returns the saved mission with ID and photo count, which is crucial behavioral info. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it does well.

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 two sentences: first states purpose and method, second states save behavior and return info. No wasted words, front-loaded with key info.

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 10 parameters and schema coverage 90%, the description covers purpose, behavior, and output. It could mention that no output schema exists but tells what's returned (ID, photo count). Lacks details on how drone_profile_id is used, but otherwise complete.

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 high (90%), so baseline is 3. The description adds context like 'grid of heading/pitch combinations' but does not detail parameter format or relationships beyond what schema provides.

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 tool creates a panorama capture mission at a fixed hover location, specifying the grid of heading/pitch combinations for stitching. It differentiates from siblings like generate_corridor_mission or generate_grid_survey by focusing on panorama and fixed hover.

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 implicitly indicates it's for panorama missions at a fixed point, contrasting with grid surveys or orbits. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives.

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