origin_plot_table_id

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'create a graph' without explaining side effects (e.g., whether a new graph layer is created, if existing graphs are overwritten), error conditions, or needed user permissions. This is insufficient for an agent.

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 fluff, but it is too terse given the tool's complexity. While concise, it sacrifices essential detail, resulting in under-specification rather than efficient communication.

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?

For a tool with 19 parameters and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain how to specify data columns, handle multiple worksheets, or configure graph properties. The existence of an output schema mitigates return value documentation but not the parameter usage context.

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 meaning only to the three required parameters (path, plot_type_id, template) but mentions none of the 16 optional parameters such as selected_cols, book_name, delimiter, or style_mode. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate, leaving most parameters unexplained.

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 graph') and the key inputs ('table data', 'Origin Plot Type ID', 'template'). However, it does not differentiate from many sibling plotting tools like origin_plot_line or origin_batch_plot_from_template, which also create graphs from table data.

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 the numerous other plotting tools (e.g., origin_plot_line for line plots). There is no mention of prerequisites, required workbook state, or when to avoid this tool.

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