raw_zoom_sel

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

The description explicitly warns about side effects: 'May open a dialog or change project state; inspect the command name first.' This discloses potential state changes and urges caution, which is transparent beyond just the action name. However, it doesn't specify exact return values, but no output schema is expected.

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 succinct—three short sentences. It front-loads the primary purpose ('Zoom to fill the current selection') and then adds necessary caveats. There is no fluff or redundant detail.

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 simple no-argument tool without an output schema, the description covers the action and potential side effects. It is complete enough for an agent to understand what it does and what to be cautious about.

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 has zero parameters, so there is nothing to describe. The description confirms this with 'no-argument.' Since schema coverage is effectively 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate; no additional parameter information is needed or provided.

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: 'Zoom to fill the current selection,' specifying the verb (zoom) and resource (selection). This makes it distinct from other zoom tools like raw_zoom_in/out, even though it doesn't explicitly compare, 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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like raw_zoom_in or raw_zoom_out. The description mentions it is a 'Static no-argument Audacity action' but doesn't explain scenarios where this is preferred over other zoom options.

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