get_camera

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe read with no side effects. The description adds no further behavioral context (no auth requirement, no error/not-found behavior, no rate limits), but with annotations covering safety the lower bar makes a 3 reasonable.

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 short sentence with no waste, and the resource and lookup key are front-loaded. Nothing is padded, though there is little content to structure.

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 one-parameter read-only tool this is close to sufficient, but with no output schema the description doesn't hint at what 'details' are returned or what happens on an unknown id. Minor but real gaps remain for an agent deciding between this and get_live_stream_urls.

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 100%, so camera_id is already documented in the schema (albeit thinly as 'Camera id'). The description only restates that lookup is 'by id' and adds no format or range detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 clear verb+resource ('Get details for a single camera') and scopes it by id, which distinguishes it from list_cameras and get_camera_count. It does not name a sibling explicitly, but the singular 'single camera by id' framing makes the distinction inferable.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives such as list_cameras or get_live_stream_urls. The only cue is the implicit singular-vs-plural contrast with the sibling list tool, which is left for the agent to infer.

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