origin_plot_from_range

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Create a graph', which implies mutation, but does not mention side effects (e.g., overwriting existing graphs), required permissions, error conditions, or what the output schema contains. The agent lacks information on behavior beyond the basic creation action.

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 of 12 words, which is concise but lacks structure. It could be improved by adding a second sentence for usage context or parameter notes. It is not overly verbose, but it misses the opportunity to be more helpful without becoming long. A more structured description (e.g., purpose sentence then parameter overview) would earn a higher score.

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 tool has 8 parameters, many siblings, and an output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain the return value (despite having an output schema), does not provide error handling or limitations, and leaves the agent to infer how to use parameters like export_path or plot_type. The description needs significantly more detail to be contextually complete.

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?

The input schema has 8 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the tool description adds almost no parameter explanation beyond referencing 'range' and 'template'. The parameters plot_type, graph_name, title, labels, and export_path are left entirely undefined. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions, leaving the agent without essential semantic context for many parameters.

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 tool creates a graph from an existing Origin range and template. It specifies the verb 'create' and the resource 'graph', and distinguishes from siblings like origin_batch_plot_from_template (which works from template but not necessarily from a range) and origin_plot_line (which plots specific data directly). However, it could be more explicit about the difference from other plot tools.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus its many siblings, such as origin_plot_line or origin_batch_plot_from_template. It implies that it requires an existing range and template, but does not explain prerequisites, or when alternatives are more appropriate. This is a significant gap given the large sibling list.

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