Spss Chart Line

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it discloses the underlying mechanism (GGRAPH + OMS IMAGE), the format options, and that a file path is returned. However, it omits permissions, overwrite behavior, output location control, and validation constraints, leaving meaningful behavioral gaps.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action and format. Little waste, though the parenthetical format list and GGRAPH/OMS jargon add minor noise.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, but for a 10-parameter chart tool with 0% schema coverage the description is far too thin. It omits sizing, labeling, resolution, and data-source parameters an agent needs to call it correctly.

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 10 parameters, yet the description explains only x and y. Eight parameters (dpi, title, x_label, y_label, width_px, height_px, data_file, image_format) are undocumented in both schema and description, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb (Export) and resource (line chart), plus the output formats PNG/TIFF, so the agent can distinguish it from spss_chart_scatter or spss_chart_bar by the chart type. It stops short of explicit sibling differentiation, but the chart type is unambiguous.

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?

It says to provide x and y variables but gives no guidance on when to prefer a line chart over the sibling chart tools or what prerequisites are needed. Usage is only implied by the input hint.

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