zoom

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action ('zoom the camera') without mentioning any side effects, whether the view is reset, if the operation is reversible, or any dependencies on previously loaded structures. This lack of detail leaves the agent unaware of potential impacts beyond the immediate camera change.

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?

The description is a single, concise sentence with zero redundant words. It directly conveys the core purpose, making it efficient and well-structured. No fluff or unnecessary detail is present.

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?

The tool is simple, with full parameter documentation in the schema and an output schema provided, mitigating the need for return-value explanation. However, the description lacks context about when to use it among similar camera tools and gives no behavioral nuance. For a minimal tool this is acceptable but still leaves room for improvement.

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 100%: both 'buffer' and 'selection' have descriptive text in the schema. The tool description itself does not mention parameters, so it adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. According to the rubric, the baseline of 3 applies when the schema fully documents parameters, and no extra description is needed.

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 'Zoom the camera onto a selection' uses a specific verb ('Zoom') and clearly identifies the resource ('camera') and target ('selection'). This directly distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'orient' or 'turn', which adjust camera orientation rather than zoom.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not state when to choose 'zoom' over 'orient', 'turn', or other camera-related tools, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. The usage is only implied by the tool's name and purpose.

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