plot_air_quality_history

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds value by detailing output formats (png, webp, svg, html), time range handling, and timezone behavior. It doesn't contradict annotations and provides transparency beyond structured fields.

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?

Description is well-structured with clear sections (purpose, when to use, selector, output format, required, time range). Every sentence adds value; no redundancy or fluff. Concise yet comprehensive.

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?

Given 15 parameters, 1 required, no output schema, the description covers essential aspects: data selection, required sensor, time range, output formats, and timezone handling. It lacks clarity on combining multiple selectors and details on chart_type/dark mode, but overall provides sufficient context for an AI agent.

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%, but the description compensates by explaining critical parameters: sensor, device/location/group selectors, time range (last_hours, from/to_datetime), output_format, and timezone_name. It misses some parameters like title, axis titles, chart_type, dark, max_points, but covers the most important ones.

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 'Generate a chart of historical air-Q sensor data' with a specific verb (Generate) and resource (historical air-Q sensor data). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_air_quality_history which likely returns raw data, not a chart.

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?

Description has a 'WHEN TO USE THIS TOOL' section explicitly stating to call it when user asks for a graph, chart, plot, or visual representation. It explains selector logic (device, location, group) and output format options. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use, but context implies alternatives.

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