origin_plot_matrix_3d_scatter

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the basic action. It does not mention side effects (e.g., creating a graph object), permissions, or whether the operation is destructive. Given the lack of annotations, this is a significant gap.

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 with no waste, but it is too sparse. Conciseness is valuable only if the content is sufficient; here, it sacrifices necessary detail. The structure is front-loaded but lacks completeness.

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 an output schema (so return values need not be explained), the description fails to cover the purpose of parameters or usage context. The tool has moderate complexity (4 parameters), and the description is insufficient for an agent to use it reliably.

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 provides no explanation of the parameters. With 0% schema description coverage and four parameters (including optional ones like 'graph_name' and 'export_path'), the agent has no guidance on how to fill them correctly. The description only reiterates the need for 'data_range' indirectly.

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 (create) and the resource (3D scatter plot from an existing Origin matrix range). The name includes 'matrix', which differentiates it from similar 3D scatter tools using worksheet data, but it does not explicitly compare to siblings like 'origin_plot_3d_scatter'.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus other plotting tools. The description does not mention prerequisites, data format requirements, or context for choosing this tool over alternatives like 'origin_plot_3d_scatter' or 'origin_plot_matrix_3d_surface'.

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