origin_plot_line

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. The description only mentions importing data and creating a graph, omitting side effects (e.g., project modification), permissions, or error states. The agent is left guessing about the tool's impact.

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 extremely concise (one sentence), which is positive, but it sacrifices necessary detail. For a tool with many parameters, more structure (e.g., key options) is warranted. The conciseness is decent but insufficient for the complexity.

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?

Despite having many parameters and no output schema details, the description is minimal. It does not cover customization options, export behavior, or error handling. The tool is complex, but the description leaves the agent underinformed.

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 description adds zero parameter information to the input schema, which has 22 parameters and 0% schema description coverage. While some parameter names are self-explanatory (e.g., title), many are obscure (style_mode, y_error_col). The agent receives no help understanding parameter meaning.

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 imports table data and creates a line graph, specifying the verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like origin_plot_scatter or origin_plot_line_symbol, which could lead to confusion about when to use this specific tool.

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 alternatives. There is no mention of preferred data types, conditions for line plotting, or exclusions. The agent lacks context to decide between this and other plot types.

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