editor_create_camera

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states that a Camera3D node is created, but does not mention prerequisites (e.g., an open scene), error behavior if the scene is not open, whether the node is attached to the scene root or parent, or any side effects like selection. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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, clear sentence with no filler or redundant information. It is appropriately concise for a simple create operation.

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 description is minimal but covers the core action. However, without annotations or an output schema, it lacks context about expected behavior when the scene is not open, naming conventions, or property application. It is adequate for a simple tool but leaves 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%, and the schema already explains the name, parent, and properties parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the 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 specific action 'Create a Camera3D node' and the context 'in the open scene'. It distinguishes this tool from camera-related siblings like create_camera_attributes (which creates a resource) and read_camera (which reads camera properties).

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 usage when the goal is to add a Camera3D to the current scene, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like editor_add_node, create_camera_attributes, or other editor_create_* tools. No exclusions or alternatives are provided.

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