Zoom canvas to coordinate

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=false), and the description adds context beyond them: it clarifies the coordinate space (document/canvas coordinates) and discloses that the call has a visible side effect on the user's viewport, which is what makes idempotentHint=false intelligible. It does not describe rate limits or how tabId scoping behaves, so it falls short of a 5.

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 tightly written sentences, with the core action front-loaded and the usage routing second. No filler or restated name/title.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description needn't detail the return value, though it helpfully summarizes it as the resulting viewport rectangle. Combined with the disclosed coordinate space and sibling routing, an agent has enough to call it correctly; only the tabId parameter remains opaque.

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%, so the description carries the burden. It does clarify the meaning of x/y ('coordinate', 'document/canvas coordinates') and scale, which is real added value, but tabId is left completely unexplained and no format or default values are given for the optional parameters.

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?

Specific verb (Zoom) + resource (EasyEDA canvas) + input semantics (coordinate/scale) + return value (viewport rectangle). It also distinguishes itself from easyeda_canvas_capture by naming that sibling directly, so an agent can tell them apart without opening either schema.

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?

Explicitly states both usage modes: 'to frame a location before calling easyeda_canvas_capture, or standalone to navigate the user's view to a point of interest.' The alternative and the condition selecting it are both named, leaving nothing to inference.

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