openpanel_add_chart

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but fails to deliver. While 'Add' implies a write operation, the description omits whether the operation returns the created chart ID, error handling behavior, or required permissions. No information about side effects or mutation scope is provided.

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 appropriately brief at one sentence, but the '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be leaked metadata rather than useful content. While front-loaded, the single sentence wastes no words on the actual purpose, though this extreme brevity contributes to the lack of parameter and behavioral documentation.

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 with zero schema descriptions, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is woefully incomplete. The complexity of the input schema (nested objects in 'events', required relationships between site/project_id/dashboard_id) demands explanatory text that is entirely absent.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for its 7 parameters, and the description provides no compensation for this gap. Critical parameters like 'events' (array of objects), 'chart_type' (string with no enum), and 'site' are completely undocumented, leaving the agent with no guidance on valid values or data formats.

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 new chart to a dashboard, using specific verb and resource identifiers. It sufficiently distinguishes from siblings like openpanel_update_chart or openpanel_delete_chart by specifying this creates a new chart instance, though the '[UNIFIED]' prefix is unexplained metadata that slightly obscures the opening.

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 use this tool versus alternatives like openpanel_update_chart, nor does it mention prerequisites such as needing an existing dashboard_id. There is no indication of whether this operation is idempotent or what happens if the dashboard already contains a chart with the same title.

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