Render all scene cameras

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

Annotations already disclose destructive intent (destructiveHint=true) and non-read-only nature. The description adds valuable context: headless process, collision-safe file names, and per-camera results. This goes beyond the structured annotations, though it omits details like error handling or overwrite behavior (which are in the 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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the primary action ('Discover every saved camera') followed by key attributes. Every phrase earns its place—headless process, collision-safe filenames, per-camera results—without redundancy.

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's complexity (10 parameters) and the presence of a full output schema, the description provides a solid overview: it states the operation, scope (all cameras), and notable behavior (headless, collision-safe, per-camera). It doesn't need to explain return values due to the output schema, and annotations cover the destructive nature. Minor gaps remain around error handling or overwrite semantics, but these are covered by the schema.

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 description does not delve into parameter specifics, but the input schema provides 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all 10 parameters. Thus, the description adds no additional semantic value beyond what the schema already offers, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's function: discover every saved camera and render each view in one headless process. This distinguishes it from siblings like keyshot_render (single render) or keyshot_list_cameras (listing only) by emphasizing 'every saved camera' and 'per-camera results'.

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 description implies the tool is for batch rendering all cameras, providing clear context for when to use it. However, it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as when only a specific camera is needed or when interactive rendering is required.

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