jump_to_view3d_object_data_by_name

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

With destructiveHint=true, the description adds useful behavioral context by explicitly saying that allow_edits=True may un-hide the object and enable its collections. It does not contradict the annotation, though it could further clarify what 'destructive' means in this context.

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 sentences with no filler: the first states the core operation, the second handles the only conditional behavior. The important scoping is front-loaded.

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 navigation tool with an output schema and annotations, the description covers purpose and conditional side effects. It is slightly incomplete because it does not distinguish itself from the near-identical sibling or state what happens when no object matches, but it is sufficient for basic invocation.

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%, but the description compensates by defining name as a matching data block and explaining allow_edits' side effects. It gives more meaning than the schema's bare field names, though it could define 'data block' more explicitly (e.g., exact vs. partial matching).

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 states a specific action ('Move the 3D viewport') and target ('object whose data block matches name'), which is clear. It does not explicitly contrast with the similarly named sibling jump_to_view3d_object_by_name, though 'data block' hints at the distinction.

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 given about when to choose this tool over jump_to_view3d_object_by_name or other sibling tools. The allow_edits note is a parameter behavior, not tool-selection guidance, so an agent has to infer when this variant is appropriate.

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