Build chart option for echart-mcp-view App

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only behavior is covered. The description adds that it 'validates chart input and returns a table view model or ECharts option', which is helpful beyond annotations. No side effects or auth needs are disclosed, but the annotations already indicate safety.

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 of 21 words, extremely concise. It front-loads the purpose ('App-only helper...') and wastes no words. Every part is meaningful given the brevity.

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 10 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description is very brief. It does not provide a high-level overview of how the parameters interact or what typical use cases are. For a tool with such complexity, the description is incomplete, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description only says 'validates chart input' without adding specific parameter context. It does not explain the roles of complex parameters like encoding or advanced, so it adds minimal semantic value 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 validates chart input and returns a table view model or ECharts option for the current MCP App payload. The verb 'validates' and 'returns' specify the action, and 'App-only helper' provides context. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like echart_mcp_view_open_bar, which likely directly render specific charts.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling open_* tools. The phrase 'App-only helper' hints at internal use but does not explain conditions or alternatives. There is no mention of when not to use it or prerequisites.

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