Spss Chart Histogram

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose useful behavior beyond the schema: the underlying GGRAPH + OMS IMAGE mechanism, the supported output formats, and that a chart file path is returned for submission. It omits other behavioral facts, though (whether files are written to disk, where, any session/permission requirements).

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 tightly written sentences with the action and output front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though the brevity trades away needed detail rather than being optimally balanced.

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 9-parameter tool with zero schema coverage and no annotations, this description is too thin: it covers only the required variable and the return value (which the output schema already handles). An agent lacks enough context to set dimensions, format, or supply a data_file.

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% across 9 parameters, so the description must compensate and explains only the required 'variable' (continuous). It says nothing about dpi, width_px/height_px, title, x_label/y_label, data_file, or image_format, leaving most parameters undocumented in prose.

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+resource: 'Export a publication-ready histogram (PNG/TIFF)'. This is clearly distinguishable from scatter/bar/line siblings. However, it fails to differentiate from the nearest sibling spss_chart_histogram_density, which an agent must choose between; that omission holds it back from a 5.

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?

Only the terse directive 'Provide the continuous variable' hints at usage; there is no statement of when to use this versus spss_chart_histogram_density or other chart tools, no prerequisites (e.g., a loaded dataset/session), and no exclusions.

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