zoom_to_layer

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

The behavior is stated plainly as a view-only zoom/pan operation on the active map, and the exact-name requirement is useful. However, with no annotations, the description does not explicitly address prerequisites, error behavior for unknown layers, or confirm that no data is modified.

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 short sentences plus an argument line, with the primary action front-loaded. Every sentence adds useful information and there is no redundancy.

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 single-parameter navigation tool, the description covers what it affects (active map view), the scope (full extent), and the required input format. It is missing only minor behavior notes such as what happens if the layer name is invalid.

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%, so the description must carry the parameter meaning. It does: 'Exact layer name as shown in the Contents pane' tells the agent both the source and accuracy required for the 'name' parameter.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource pairing: 'Zoom and pan the active map view to show the full extent of a layer.' This clearly identifies the map-navigation purpose and distinguishes it from siblings that add, remove, or manipulate layers.

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?

The tool's intended situation is evident: use it when the agent needs to navigate the active map view to a layer's full extent. It does not state explicit exclusions or alternatives, but no sibling provides comparable zooming behavior, so the context is sufficient.

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