turn

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does reveal that the operation affects the camera rather than the model, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not clarify whether the rotation is incremental, how it interacts with existing camera state, or if any side effects on the scene occur. The description is truthful but minimal.

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, efficiently worded sentence that delivers the core purpose without clutter. It earns its place and is appropriately sized for a simple two-parameter tool.

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?

The tool is simple and the schema fully documents parameters, but the description lacks contextual information such as when to use it relative to siblings, whether the rotation is relative or absolute, and what state changes occur. For a tool with no annotations, this sparse guidance leaves some gaps.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both 'axis' and 'angle' having clear descriptions and the angle having a default. The tool description adds no new meaning beyond the schema—'about an axis' simply restates the axis parameter. Baseline 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 rotates the camera about an axis, which is a specific verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'zoom' (scaling) and 'orient' (likely alignment), though it does not explicitly name any alternatives.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'orient' or 'zoom'. It does not mention common use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the schema alone.

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