obj_zoom

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

No annotations, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It only says it returns a confirmation dictionary; it omits whether it acts on the active view/document, what happens with no selection under "selection", and whether the zoom is persisted with the document.

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?

Two short, front-loaded lines with no padding: the purpose first, then the parameter meanings. The Args/Returns docstring formatting is slightly verbose but harmless.

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?

Output schema exists so return values needn't be explained, and the single parameter is covered. What's missing for a viewport-mutating UI tool is the operating context: which view/document is zoomed and the empty-selection failure mode.

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 coverage is 0% and the single parameter has no enum, so the description is the sole source of meaning. It documents both values, "fit" (show all) and "selection" (zoom to selected objects), which is exactly what an agent needs to choose correctly.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: control the viewport zoom level. Combined with the arg values it's clear what it does; it doesn't explicitly differentiate from nearby view tools like obj_switch_view or obj_refresh_document, but the zoom framing is distinct enough.

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 versus other viewport/view tools, no prerequisites (an active document or selection must presumably exist), and no mention of the failure case for "selection" when nothing is selected.

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