editor_get_camera

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'Get' clearly signals a non-mutating read operation, and no side effects are implied. It could add context about prerequisites or coordinate space, but for a simple getter, the description is sufficiently transparent.

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 sentence of eight words, front-loaded with the verb 'Get' and a direct, specific object. Every word is essential, and there is no wasted text or 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?

For a tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately conveys what it does and what it returns (position). It lacks explicit details on return type or coordinate system, but such details are not critical for a simple getter and the description remains complete enough for effective selection and invocation.

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 schema coverage is trivially 100% and the baseline score for no parameters is 4. The description correctly does not attempt to explain nonexistent parameters, adding no noise.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' with the resource '3D editor viewport camera' and the attribute 'position', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like editor_set_camera (set vs get) and read_camera (which reads a camera node's properties). This makes the purpose unambiguous and highly specific.

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 clear context: it is for retrieving the 3D editor viewport camera position, implying when it should be used. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as when to use read_camera or list_cameras instead, so it falls short of the highest rating.

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