Data Analytics MCP Toolkit

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states what the tool does, not how it behaves. It doesn't disclose whether this creates a new plot, modifies an existing one, requires specific data formats, has side effects, or how errors are handled. The description is minimal and lacks behavioral 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?

The description is extremely concise with a single sentence that front-loads the essential information. Every word earns its place, and there's no wasted text or redundancy.

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 5-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., a plot object, file path, or visualization), doesn't cover all parameters, and provides minimal behavioral context despite the complexity.

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 must compensate but only mentions x_column and y_columns. It doesn't explain data_id, title, or session_id parameters, leaving 3 of 5 parameters undocumented. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema's property names.

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 clearly states the tool creates a line chart with specific axis mappings ('x_column on x-axis, one or more y_columns as lines'), which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes from siblings like plot_bar or plot_scatter by specifying the chart type, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with all visualization alternatives.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like plot_scatter or plot_histogram. The description mentions the chart type but doesn't indicate appropriate data scenarios (e.g., time series, continuous data) or when other tools might be better suited.

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