zoom_to_layer

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states what the tool does but doesn't describe side effects (e.g., whether it changes the map view permanently, requires specific permissions, or has rate limits). For a view-modification tool, this lack of behavioral context is a significant gap.

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, clear sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and appropriately sized for a simple tool with one parameter.

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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It explains the basic purpose but lacks crucial details about behavior, parameter usage, and expected outcomes. For a tool that modifies the map view, more context is needed for effective use.

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 schema provides no parameter documentation. The description mentions 'specified layer' which implies the 'layer_id' parameter, adding minimal semantic context. However, it doesn't explain what constitutes a valid layer ID or where to obtain it, leaving the parameter largely 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 clearly states the action ('zoom to the extent') and target resource ('specified layer'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'get_layers' or 'render_map', but the verb+resource combination is specific enough for basic understanding.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., whether the layer must already be loaded), nor does it differentiate from similar operations like adjusting view through other means. The description is purely functional without contextual advice.

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