apex_add_mini_charts_row

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, non-idempotent write operation. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that—it does not mention side effects on the page, constraints, or what happens to existing content. The shorthand '{label, sql, color}' actually conflicts with the schema and adds confusion.

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 very short, but the second sentence is an incomplete fragment that is not precisely accurate. It is concise in length but not optimally structured due to the misleading shorthand.

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 mutation tool that adds charts to a page, the description lacks critical context such as the target page_id, the 1–6 chart limit, and any side effects. The presence of an output schema does not compensate for the missing operational 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all parameters. The tool description adds no value and even introduces misleading shorthand that contradicts the schema's detailed chart fields (region_name, chart_type, sql, etc.).

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 ('Add') and the resource ('a row of mini sparkline charts'), giving a specific verb+object. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like apex_add_sparkline or other chart-related tools, so it lacks sibling distinction.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no mention of prerequisites. The description is a single terse line and provides no usage context.

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