Update DataLens wizard chart

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

It adds key behavioral context beyond the annotations: DataLens does not check the revision, and saving overwrites anything written since the chart was read. This is important for avoiding lost concurrent edits. There is mild tension with destructiveHint=false, but the warning concerns overwrite risk rather than direct resource deletion, so it is not a clear contradiction.

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?

Two compact sentences, front-loaded with the essential workflow and followed by a critical overwrite warning. There is no wasted text.

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 with rich schema descriptions, no output schema, and annotations covering idempotency and destructiveness, the description supplies the critical operational warning about overwrites. It could still say more about when to choose this tool over sibling chart-update tools, but it is largely complete.

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 parameter meanings are already well documented. The description reinforces whole-object replacement and ignored revision checking, but adds little parameter-specific detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 states a specific verb and resource: saving/updating a wizard chart, with the full read-change-send workflow. It clearly distinguishes the wizard chart subtype, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling update tools for editor or QL charts.

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 implies the update workflow: read the chart, change it, send it back whole. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance versus alternatives such as datalens_charts_wizard_create, datalens_charts_editor_update, or datalens_charts_ql_update.

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