zoom_to_layer

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure, but it only states the basic action. It does not disclose side effects (e.g., saving changes), requirements (e.g., open map), or behavior for edge cases (e.g., when layer is not visible).

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 sentence with no extraneous words. It is efficiently front-loaded with the core functionality.

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 the tool has 4 parameters, no annotations, and multiple sibling tools, the description is too brief. It does not cover key contextual aspects like how the 'default camera' is used, impact of the 'save' flag, or the relationship to map extents.

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% per context, yet the tool description adds no parameter-level context beyond what the schema already provides. It does not explain the role of 'save' or 'map_name' parameters, nor their defaults.

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 ('Set'), the resource ('map's default camera'), and the target ('layer's extent'). It is specific and distinguishable from generic mapping tools, though it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'set_map_extent_from_layer'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'set_map_extent_from_layer' or 'set_map_scale'. The description lacks context about prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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