pcb_zoom_to_board

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

Annotations mark this as non-read-only but idempotent and non-destructive, which is consistent with a viewport change. The description adds the useful detail that it fits the 'entire board outline' (as opposed to a selection or region), which is genuine behavioral context. No annotation contradiction.

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 zero filler; the action and its scope are stated in one breath.

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 param-light, non-destructive viewport tool with full schema coverage and annotations covering safety, the description is essentially complete. Only minor context, such as whether it needs an active document, is left implied.

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 coverage is 100%, so both document and instance_id are fully documented in the schema, including auto-switch and multi-instance semantics. The description adds nothing about parameters; baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the load.

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) plus resource (viewport) and target scope (entire board outline). An agent immediately knows what it does. It does not, however, distinguish itself from related viewport tools like pcb_navigate_to or pcb_navigate_to_region.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no alternative named. The description is purely declarative, leaving the agent to infer that this is the 'fit board' action rather than a region or coordinate navigation.

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