ptz_patrol_start

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and parameter meanings; it does not mention side effects, whether an existing patrol is stopped or replaced, camera requirements, or error conditions.

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 terse and front-loaded with the primary action, followed by three concise parameter notes. Every line adds value without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value documentation is unnecessary. The parameter semantics are covered well, but as a mutating control action with no annotations, the description omits behavioral context such as prerequisites, side effects, and failure modes, leaving the agent with an incomplete operational picture.

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 input schema provides only bare types with 0% description coverage, and the description compensates by explaining all three parameters: host formats, slot meaning, and how to obtain camera_id from list_cameras. This is meaningful semantic value beyond the schema.

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: 'Start a PTZ patrol on a preset slot.' This identifies the specific verb, resource, and target action. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like ptz_goto_preset or ptz_patrol_stop, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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 such as ptz_goto_preset or ptz_patrol_stop. The only contextual note is that camera_id should come from list_cameras, which is a prerequisite hint rather than usage-selection guidance.

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