set_axis

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose effects and prerequisites, but it only lists configurable options. It does not say whether changes are reversible, whether permissions are needed, or what happens when values are null, nor does it describe return behavior.

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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every clause covers a distinct setting. 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?

For a 10-param tool with no annotations/output schema, the description packs in most behavioral semantics for the configurable fields. It lacks explicit guidance on the session/page/visual targeting parameters and return behavior, but the core functionality is well covered.

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 covers only 5 of 10 parameters, but the description adds meaning by explaining axis values, the value-axis start/end, display units enum, and gridline toggling. It maps well to the schema and compensates for the other half, though it does not elaborate on targeting parameters.

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 identifies the tool's purpose with a specific verb+resource ('Configure a chart axis') and enumerates the settings it controls. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like set_play_axis, but the x/y category-vs-value framing makes the target clear.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is present, and no alternatives are mentioned. The description implies it is for axis configuration, but competing tools like set_play_axis exist, so an agent would have no exclusion criteria.

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