zoom_extents

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

Annotations are present (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false) and already cover the safety profile, but the description adds nothing behavioral on top of them — it does not say whether this only changes the camera/view state versus the drawing data, nor what happens on an empty drawing or with multiple viewports.

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?

A single short sentence that front-loads the action and states the outcome with no filler. Nothing is padded or buried.

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 zero-parameter view command with an output schema, the description is minimally sufficient, but it omits the zoom_window distinction and any note on scope (current viewport vs. all viewports) or behavior on an empty drawing.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline credit applies. No parameter detail is needed or missing.

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 concrete verb (zoom) and target (the view) plus the scope of the result (whole drawing), so an agent knows exactly what the call produces. It does not name or contrast with the obvious sibling zoom_window, so the sibling differentiation is left to inference.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of the natural alternative zoom_window for zooming to a user-specified region. The intent is only weakly implied by 'show the whole drawing'.

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