polynodes_camera_zoom

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The only addition is 'Returns: JSON confirmation', which duplicates what the existing output schema already communicates; nothing about state change, persistence, or scope is disclosed.

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 core sentence is short and front-loaded, but the 'Args: params: value' and 'Returns: JSON confirmation' lines are boilerplate padding that restate the schema and output schema rather than adding information.

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 camera tool with an output schema and annotations covering safety, the description is minimally sufficient to call it. It still leaves open which camera/scene is targeted and how large a zoom step is meaningful, so it is adequate rather than complete.

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 reported as 0%, so the description is expected to compensate. It restates the sign convention (positive=in, negative=out) but gives no units, valid range, or magnitude guidance, and the 'Args: params: value' line is a tautology that clarifies nothing.

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 first sentence gives a specific verb and resource (zoom the 3D camera) plus the sign convention, which is enough to distinguish it from most siblings. It does not, however, differentiate itself from the closely related polynodes_camera_rotate that appears in the sibling list.

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 statement of when to use this versus alternatives, no prerequisites (e.g. which scene/camera is affected), and no mention of polynodes_camera_rotate even though camera navigation is the obvious adjacent capability.

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