Set Canvas Scale

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

Annotations already provide idempotentHint: true, indicating safe repeated calls. The description adds clarity on value formats (denominator, degree range), which is beyond the schema. No contradictions; the description is transparent about the operation.

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 focused sentences with zero wasted words. Every sentence adds value: first states the purpose, second explains parameter format. Front-loaded and concise.

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 simple tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description is fully complete. It covers what the tool does, how to provide inputs, and the expected format. No gaps.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully explains the parameter semantics: scale is a denominator (e.g., 50000 for 1:50000), rotation in degrees (0-360). This adds crucial meaning beyond the schema's bare type info.

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 uses a specific verb ('Set') and resource ('map canvas scale and/or rotation'), clearly distinguishing from siblings like get_canvas_scale (which retrieves) and set_canvas_extent (which sets extent). It explicitly states the action and the target.

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 description tells when to use the tool (to set scale/rotation) and how to specify values (denominator for scale, degrees for rotation). It does not explicitly mention when not to use it, but the alternatives (e.g., get_canvas_scale) are inferable from sibling tools.

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