camera_set

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose side effects, persistence of settings, error handling, or requirements (e.g., camera connection). The examples hint at value formats but provide no behavioral context.

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 one short sentence with four examples. It is front-loaded and every word earns its place with no fluff.

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 simple two-parameter setter with an output schema, the description is minimally adequate with examples. However, missing usage guidelines and transparency prevent it from being fully complete in 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%, but the description provides concrete examples (iso=800, aperture=5.6, shutterspeed=1/125, iso=Auto) that clarify how to format the value parameter for at least some settings. It doesn't cover all enum values, but adds partial meaning.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'カメラ設定を変更する' (changes camera settings), with examples of valid settings. It is clear what the tool does, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like camera_status or camera_capture.

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 versus alternatives. The examples imply usage but there is no explicit context about prerequisites, sequencing with camera_capture, or when not to use it.

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