describe_camera_api

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool is a documentation/informational tool and specifies the feature set it covers. There is no unsafe or unexpected behavior implied, which is appropriate for a 'describe' tool, though it does not elaborate on response format or side effects beyond the output schema.

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, with the first defining the purpose and the second giving usage guidance. It is front-loaded, concise, and contains no filler, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

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 the tool has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description is complete: it states what the tool does, when to call it, and what its documentation covers. The sibling tool names are provided in context, so the agent is well-oriented without missing critical information.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline of 4 applies, and the description appropriately focuses on use case rather than argument syntax, since the schema is empty.

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 'Describe the spatial camera API exposed by this MCP server,' giving a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling search tools by positioning itself as an API reference/entry point, not a searching tool.

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 phrase 'Call this first when unsure which search tool to use' provides explicit when-to-use guidance. It also clarifies scope by naming the capabilities it documents (bounds pan, radius, route, nearest), which helps the agent decide if this is the right entry point.

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