zoom_extents

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses an important side effect: if AutoCAD is hidden (Visible=False), it first brings the window to front, with a rationale. This is useful behavioral context beyond the basic zoom operation, though it does not mention all potential side effects.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and a conditional side-effect explanation. No wasted words, appropriately sized.

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 operation is simple and has an output schema, so return values need not be described. The description covers the main action and the notable hidden-window behavior, but the unclear parameter semantics prevent a perfect score.

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 description does not explicitly explain the 'mostrar_ventana' parameter. It indirectly references showing/hiding the window, but the agent must infer the parameter's relationship to the described behavior, which is insufficient for a 0-coverage schema.

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?

Description states 'Zoom a la extension del dibujo activo' — a specific verb (zoom) and resource (active drawing extents), clearly distinguishing it from sibling drawing/query tools. No other sibling provides zoom behavior.

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?

Implied usage: use to zoom to extents of the active drawing. It provides context about hidden windows but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or when not to use it.

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