Scatter Chart

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds context about themes and optional lines, but doesn't disclose any unexpected behaviors or side effects. With strong annotations, the description adds moderate value.

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?

Two concise sentences with no superfluous information. Front-loaded with the core purpose and key features. Every sentence adds value.

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?

No output schema exists, so description should clarify what the tool returns (e.g., an image URL, HTML, etc.). It says 'render' but not the format. Otherwise, given complex nested input and good annotations, the description is adequate but could be more 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?

Schema coverage is high (86%), so schema documents most parameters. The description mentions themes and optional connecting lines, which are already covered by schema properties. No additional semantic guidance is provided beyond what's in the input schema.

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 it renders a scatter plot with x/y coordinate data, supporting multiple series and optional connecting lines. It distinguishes from sibling chart tools by specifying the data type (x/y coordinates) and features like multiple series. Could be more explicit about use cases like correlation or distribution.

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 vs alternatives like render_line_chart or render_bubble_map. The description doesn't mention when not to use or provide contextual cues for selection among many sibling chart tools.

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