zoomToExtent

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

The description only says 'Zoom' without explaining behavioral traits like animation (controlled by the 'duration' parameter) or view changes. Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds no extra behavioral context beyond that.

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 extremely concise at 5 words. It is front-loaded and efficient, though it could benefit from a bit more detail (e.g., mentioning animation or bounding box) without becoming verbose.

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?

Despite 6 parameters and no output schema, the description provides minimal context. It does not explain the return behavior, constraints (e.g., valid extent values), or how the tool affects the current view. The annotations fill some gaps but the description remains incomplete for full understanding.

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?

All 6 parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, but neither does it omit necessary context.

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') and the resource ('specified geographic extent'). It is specific enough to distinguish from sibling tools like 'flyTo' which may animate to a point, but could be improved by explicitly mentioning the bounding box parameters.

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 such as 'flyTo' or 'setView'. The description does not provide context or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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