origin_add_graph_label

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry the burden. The description only says 'add a text label' with no mention of side effects, return value, or whether the operation modifies the graph in place. The existence of an output schema is not acknowledged.

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 sentence, which is concise, but it is too brief for a tool with 7 parameters. It lacks structure such as parameter explanations or usage hints. It could be more helpful without adding much length.

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 the high complexity (7 parameters, 0% schema coverage, existing output schema, many sibling tools), the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain how to specify the target graph/layer, label properties, or what the output contains.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. However, the description provides no explanation for any of the 7 parameters (text, graph_name, layer_index, name, left, top, font_size). The agent gets no help understanding what these parameters control beyond their 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 action (add a text label) and target (graph layer). It is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like origin_add_reference_line or origin_add_plot_to_graph.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives, such as when to add a label versus a reference line. No prerequisites (e.g., need an existing graph layer) or exclusions are mentioned.

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