zoom_to

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose one key trait: "Does not modify the model," which tells the agent it is non-destructive to geometry. However, it omits what happens when both optional params are omitted (zoom to entire model?), whether both params can be combined, and what the call returns.

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 compact clauses, front-loaded with the action and scope, followed by the key non-mutation guarantee. No filler 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 simple two-optional-param camera tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose and the identifier semantics, but it is silent on the default behavior with no arguments and on the return value, leaving an agent to guess at edge cases.

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%, so the description must compensate, and it partially does by explaining that 'ids' are persistent_id values and 'group_names' are the alternative selector. It still leaves precedence/combination behavior and the default when neither is supplied undocumented.

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 names a specific verb ("Zoom/frame the SketchUp camera") and the resource it acts on (given entities), and clarifies the two identifier modes. No sibling tool in the list performs camera framing, so it is unambiguous against alternatives like screenshot or select.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is for framing entities before a screenshot or inspection, but the description never states when to prefer this over select, get_selection, or screenshot. No exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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