vw2d_select

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows this is not a data mutation, and the description usefully adds that the viewport zooms by default. However, it does not say whether the selection replaces the existing selection, what happens with invalid or empty uuids, or whether the zoom is animated/blocking, which are the meaningful behavioral facts for a UI manipulation tool.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the action and its effect are stated immediately. It is efficient but slightly too terse given the parameter ambiguity.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema this is minimally adequate: the read-only safety profile comes from annotations and the zoom side effect is noted. It is still incomplete on uuid sourcing/format and on whether the call replaces or augments the current selection.

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 full burden: it only hints at the 'zoom' parameter ('and zoom to them') and says nothing about what 'uuids' should contain or where they come from. Neither parameter's default (zoom=true) or format is explained.

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 gives a specific verb ('Select') and resource ('objects in Vectorworks'), plus an additional side effect (zoom to them), which differentiates it from read-only siblings like vw_get_selection. It stops short of explicitly naming the sibling it is not, so it does not reach the top band.

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 clause 'so the user sees what was drawn or changed' implies a post-draw/post-edit usage context, but the description never states when to prefer this over vw_get_selection or vw_find_objects, nor any prerequisites such as needing valid uuids.

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