plot_iso_20816_chart

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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavior. It discloses that it creates an interactive HTML plot and returns the file path, but lacks details on file location, overwrite behavior, or required permissions. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 structured with a lead sentence, a bullet-like list of chart features, and a parameter list. It is somewhat lengthy but well-organized. Could be slightly more concise without losing essential details.

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 visualization tool with 5 parameters and no annotations, the description covers the chart output and parameter meanings. It does not explain file naming or side effects, but with an output schema present, the lack of return value details is acceptable. Overall, it provides adequate context for proper use.

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%, but the description provides brief explanations for all 5 parameters, including default values and allowed options (e.g., machine_group: 1 for large >300kW, 2 for medium 15-300kW). This adds meaningful information beyond the 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 generates a visual chart for ISO 20816-3 zone position, listing chart elements (bar chart, marker, color-coded zones). It differentiates itself from sibling tools by specifying the ISO standard, but does not explicitly contrast with other plot tools like plot_envelope or plot_spectrum.

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 implies usage for ISO 20816-3 compliance visualization but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No guidance on prerequisites or when not to use it.

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