apex_add_area_chart

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

The description provides no information about side effects, permissions, or what happens to existing page content. Annotations are all false, so the description carries the full burden, and it fails to mention that this tool modifies the page, potentially requiring a save/commit.

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?

At two short sentences, the description is very concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it omits critical context, making it overly terse rather than appropriately concise.

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 13 parameters with many optional settings (stacked, animation, zoom, scroll), the description is far too minimal. There is no mention of the update behavior, output structure, or relationships to other page elements.

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 echoes the schema's requirement for series_list to contain SQL returning LABEL and VALUE columns. Since schema coverage is 100%, this adds minimal new meaning; it does highlight the core requirement but doesn't elaborate on any other parameters.

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 tool adds a filled area chart and specifies the required SQL columns (LABEL, VALUE). This makes the primary purpose explicit, though it does not distinguish it from sibling chart tools beyond the chart type implied by the name.

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 choose this tool over other chart types (e.g., stacked chart, gauge, or scatter plot). The description lacks context about the use case or alternatives.

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