bosch_camera_lens_elevation_set

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It reveals that this is a write/set operation and gives the HTTP contract, but it does not mention side effects, required permissions, error behavior, reversibility, or whether the change takes effect immediately.

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 compact and well-structured: the primary action and constraints come first, followed by the exact API specification. Every sentence adds operational value with no 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 two-parameter setter, the description provides enough invocation-critical detail: operation, range, unit, and raw API shape. Since an output schema exists and the schema exposes the two required parameters, the remaining gaps around authentication and side effects are noticeable but not blocking.

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. It meaningfully defines the `meters` parameter with units and a valid range (0.5-5.0) and maps it to the API body field "elevation". However, the `camera` parameter is not explicitly described beyond the API path placeholder `{id}`, leaving some interpretation to the agent.

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 action as 'Set the lens mounting height in meters (0.5-5.0)', specifying a concrete verb, resource, unit, and allowed range. This also distinguishes the tool from the sibling getter bosch_camera_lens_elevation_get.

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?

It provides a meaningful usage constraint ('Gen2 cameras only') and the exact API endpoint, which tells the agent when it is not applicable. However, it does not explicitly contrast this with related tools or explain when to prefer the getter or other camera configuration tools.

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