create_population_pyramid

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses orientation (males left, females right) and return structure, but does not mention side effects, permissions, or whether output is overwritten. Some context is provided 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?

Extremely concise with three sentences. The first sentence is front-loaded with the key purpose. Every sentence adds value with no filler.

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 7 parameters and an output schema, the description covers the core visualization purpose and return fields but lacks details on parameter usage (e.g., data structure, age groups order) and assumes domain knowledge. Adequate but not rich.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds minimal new meaning beyond stating the overall purpose (age × sex distribution). It does not elaborate on how data should be structured or explain theme/filename defaults.

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?

Description clearly states it creates a population pyramid showing age × sex distribution with males left and females right. It distinguishes from sibling chart tools by specifying the visualization type and mentioning it's for census data from RZS.

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?

Implies usage for census demographic data but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like create_chart or other chart types. No exclusionary guidance is provided.

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