origin_format_graph

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It only states the action ('Set') without explaining side effects (e.g., overwriting existing values), required permissions, or what happens if the graph does not exist. Minimal transparency beyond the operation itself.

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, front-loaded sentence of 12 words, efficiently listing the main functions. It could be considered under-specified due to omitting the 'graph_name' parameter, but it remains concise and to the point.

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 6 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema, the description covers most key functionality but lacks contextual details such as prerequisites (e.g., graph must exist), interaction with sibling tools, or expected outcomes. It is adequate but incomplete for a comprehensive understanding.

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. It maps most parameters to their purposes (title, axis labels, legend visibility, rescale) but omits 'graph_name'. While it adds meaning, it does not detail constraints or formats for the parameters, partially compensating for the missing schema descriptions.

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 explicitly states the action ('Set') and the resources (graph title, axis labels, legend visibility, optional rescale). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like origin_format_legend (legend only) and origin_set_axis (axis only).

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 versus alternatives such as origin_format_legend or origin_set_axis. The description does not mention prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent without context for selecting this tool.

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