browser_set_zoom

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It helpfully discloses the effective range (0.3–5.0) and scale semantics (1.0 = 100%), but says nothing about scope (per-tab vs global), persistence, or what happens if the factor is out of range.

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 terse fragments, front-loaded with the action. No waste, though the clipped phrasing is borderline under-specified rather than deliberately lean.

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 two-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the key numeric semantics but omits tab targeting and scope. Adequate but with a clear gap around tab_id.

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 documents the meaning and range of 'factor' well, but 'tab_id' is never mentioned, leaving the target-tab behavior of half the parameters 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Set zoom factor'), and the existence of a sibling browser_get_zoom makes the read/write distinction inferable. It doesn't explicitly name or contrast the sibling, but the action is unambiguous.

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 when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives (e.g., browser_get_zoom), and no precondition such as needing an active/targeted tab. The agent must infer usage entirely from the verb.

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