zoom

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says it zooms; it doesn't mention whether the zoom is view-only, whether it changes selection state, how to reset, or what 'current raster' means. This is a significant transparency gap for a tool without annotation support.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. However, it is so brief that it omits essential context about the required 'target' parameter, making it more under-specified than genuinely concise.

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 tool has a required nested 'target' object, an optional 'region', no output schema, and no annotations. The description doesn't clarify what 'target' is, how the zoom result is returned, or how this tool fits with sibling coordinate-select workflows. An agent cannot reliably construct a correct call beyond guessing required property names.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It ties 'region' to the zoom operation, but it says nothing about 'target'—which is the only required parameter—nor about coordinate units or the role of x/y/width/height. The required parameter is left completely unexplained.

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 states a clear verb-resource pair ('zoom into' + 'current raster') and adds the purpose ('precise coordinate selection'). It doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings, but the operation is distinct enough in the context of click/drag/scroll tools.

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 phrase 'for precise coordinate selection' implies when to use the tool, but the description doesn't say when not to use it or how it relates to siblings like mouse_move, cursor_position, or left_click. The intended context is conveyed only implicitly.

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