visualize_data

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

The annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, suggesting potential side effects, yet the description only mentions 'visualize,' implying a read-only operation. The description does not disclose any state changes, output files, or required permissions. This lack of transparency could lead an agent to misuse the tool.

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 concise, with two clear parts: a one-sentence summary and a parameter list. It is well-structured and front-loads the purpose. No extraneous information is included.

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?

Despite the complexity (many plot types and parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description does not explain what the tool returns or its prerequisites (e.g., prior analysis data). It lacks context on usage within a pipeline, making it incomplete for an agent to use without additional information.

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 description mentions only data_id and params, directing users to the VisualizationParameters schema for details. The input schema itself provides extensive descriptions for many sub-parameters, so the tool description adds minimal value beyond referencing the schema. Given the schema coverage, 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 visualizes spatial transcriptomics data. It specifies the action (visualize) and resource (spatial transcriptomics data). The name and description distinguish it from sibling tools that perform analyses rather than visualization.

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 use for creating visualizations but does not explicitly state when to use it versus other tools, such as after running analyses. It lacks guidance on prerequisites or exclusions. The sibling tools are analysis-focused, so the purpose is somewhat clear, but the description could be more direct.

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