create_slope_chart

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It describes the return format ('{filepath, title, rows}') and color meaning, but does not disclose potential side effects, authentication needs, or input constraints beyond schema. Adequate but not exceptional.

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, using four short lines to convey purpose, color legend, ideal uses, and return type. No filler or redundant information; every sentence adds value.

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's complexity (8 parameters, 4 required) and presence of an output schema, the description covers the core concept, usage, and return structure. It lacks details about top_n behavior or ranking logic, but is still reasonably complete for a chart creation tool.

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 each parameter is documented. The description adds high-level context (e.g., color coding for rank change) but does not explain parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 creates a slope chart for ranking changes between two periods, with specific color coding (green=gained rank, red=lost rank). It distinguishes from sibling chart types and includes concrete use cases (census ranking, budget shifts).

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 explicit ideal use cases (e.g., 'census ranking 2002→2022, budget share shifts, district reorderings'), which helps the agent decide when to use this tool. It lacks explicit 'when not to use' or alternatives, but the context is sufficient.

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