apex_add_scatter_plot

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

Annotations already indicate a mutation (readOnlyHint=false), and the description does not contradict this. The note about SQL columns adds a small operational detail about required data shape. However, it does not disclose side effects, prerequisites like page existence, or interactions with existing regions, so it adds only marginal behavioral context.

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 extremely concise, with two short sentences and no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core action. However, it is so sparse that it borders on under-specification, which prevents a perfect score.

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 tool with 16 parameters and 3 required, the description is inadequate as a standalone overview. It does not describe the tool's role in the APEX page lifecycle, its effects on the page, or provide an example usage. The SQL hint is already present in the schema, so the description adds little beyond a one-line action.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description's 'X_VALUE, Y_VALUE, optional LABEL' shorthand is a high-level echo of the sql_query parameter description, but it does not add syntax or value details beyond what parameters already provide. It neither significantly compensates nor hurts.

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 scatter plot, which is a specific verb+resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling chart tools beyond the chart type name. The SQL note hints at data requirements but does not add differentiation.

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 provides no guidance on when to choose a scatter plot over the many sibling chart tools (e.g., bubble chart, combo chart, jet chart). There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or alternatives. This is essentially no usage guidance beyond the tool name.

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