origin_plot_matrix_heatmap

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only mentions creation but does not specify side effects (e.g., whether the matrix is modified, if an existing graph is required, or permission needs). The description lacks necessary behavioral context.

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 short (one sentence), which is concise but omits essential details. It could include more value without becoming verbose, balancing brevity with informativeness.

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 4 parameters, no schema descriptions, and a non-trivial task (heatmap from matrix range), the description is too sparse. It does not cover prerequisites, output behavior, or integration with other Origin workflow steps, leaving significant gaps.

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%, and the description adds no parameter information. Only 'data_range' is hinted by 'matrix range', but 'graph_name', 'title', and 'export_path' are completely unexplained, leaving the agent without guidance on their meaning or usage.

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 a heatmap from an existing Origin matrix range. It uses specific verb-resource pairing but does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'origin_plot_heatmap', which likely creates heatmaps from worksheet data rather than matrix ranges.

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. Given siblings like 'origin_plot_heatmap' and 'origin_plot_from_range', the lack of context on selection criteria or prerequisites makes it hard for an agent to choose correctly.

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